[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 175 (Monday, September 12, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 55743-55768]
[FR Doc No: 2022-18605]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

49 CFR Parts 171, 172, 173, 174, 175, 176, and 177

[Docket No. PHMSA-2018-0081 (HM-250A)]
RIN 2137-AF42

Hazardous Materials: Compatibility With the Regulations of the
International Atomic Energy Agency

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

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: PHMSA, in coordination with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
proposes to amend the Hazardous Materials Regulations to maintain
alignment with international regulations and standards governing the
transportation of Class 7 radioactive materials. Specifically, PHMSA
proposes to adopt changes contained in the International Atomic Energy
Agency standards. Additionally, PHMSA proposes regulatory amendments
identified through internal regulatory review processes to update,
clarify, correct, or streamline certain regulatory requirements
applicable to the transportation of Class 7 (radioactive) materials.

DATES: Comments must be received by December 12, 2022. To the extent
possible, PHMSA will consider late-filed comments as a final rule is
developed.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
     Mail: Docket Management System.
     U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-
30, Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington,
DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue
SE, Washington, DC 20590-0001 between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.
    Instructions: Include the agency name and docket number PHMSA-2018-
0081 (HM-250A) or RIN 2137-AF42 for this rulemaking at the beginning of
your

comment. Note that all comments received will be posted without change
to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided. If sent by mail, comments must be submitted in duplicate.
Persons wishing to receive confirmation of receipt of their comments
must include a self-addressed stamped postcard.
    Docket: For access to the dockets to read background documents or
comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov or the DOT Docket
Operations Office (see ADDRESSES).
    Confidential Business Information: Confidential Business
Information (CBI) is commercial or financial information that is both
customarily and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA; 5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from
public disclosure. If your comments responsive to this NPRM contain
commercial or financial information that is customarily treated as
private, that you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or
responsive to this NPRM, it is important that you clearly designate the
submitted comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission
containing CBI as ``PROPIN'' for ``proprietary information.''
Submissions containing CBI should be sent to Alexander Wolcott, U.S.
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC
20590-0001. Any commentary that PHMSA receives which is not
specifically designated as CBI will be placed in the public docket for
this rulemaking.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alexander Wolcott, Standards and
Rulemaking Division,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or Rick Boyle, Engineering and
Research Division,<PHONE_NUMBER>, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials
Safety Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590-0001.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Executive Summary
II. Background
III. Incorporation by Reference Discussion Under 1 CFR Part 51
IV. Overview of Proposed Amendments
    A. Amendments To Harmonize With the 2012 SSR-6 and 2018 SSR-6,
Rev. 1
    B. Other Proposed Amendments
    C. Amendments Not Being Considered for Proposal
V. Section-by-Section Review
VI. Regulatory Analyses and Notices
    A. Statutory/Legal Authority
    B. Executive Order 12866 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. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
    H. Environmental Assessment
    I. Privacy Act
    J. Executive Order 13609 and International Trade Analysis
    K. Executive Order 12898 and Environmental Justice
    L. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

I. Executive Summary

    PHMSA, in coordination with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC), proposes to amend certain provisions of the Hazardous Materials
Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR parts 171 to 180) to maintain alignment with
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) regulations and standards.
Additionally, PHMSA proposes regulatory amendments identified through
internal regulatory review processes to update, clarify, correct, or
streamline certain regulatory requirements applicable to the
transportation of Class 7 radioactive materials.
    PHMSA expects adoption of the regulatory amendments proposed in
this NPRM will maintain the high safety standard currently achieved
under the HMR. PHMSA also notes that--insofar as harmonization of the
HMR with international consensus standards as proposed could reduce
delays and interruptions of hazardous materials shipments during
transportation--the proposed amendments may also lower greenhouse gas
(GHG) emissions and safety risks to minority, low-income, underserved,
and other disadvantaged populations, and communities in the vicinity of
interim storage sites and transportation arteries and hubs.
    The following list summarizes the more noteworthy proposals set
forth in this NPRM:
     Incorporation by Reference: PHMSA proposes to incorporate
by reference IAEA's 2018 Edition of Regulations for the Safe Transport
of Radioactive Material, Safety Standards Series No. SSR-6 (Rev.1);
American National Standard Institute's (ANSI) N14.1 Uranium
Hexafluoride--Packaging for Transport, 2012 Edition; and ANSI's N14.1
Uranium Hexafluoride--Packaging for Transport, 2019 Edition.
     Scope and Applicability of Subpart I (Radioactive
Materials Packaging Requirements): PHMSA proposes to except certain
shipments from the requirements of subpart I of the HMR by amending
Sec.  173.401. First, PHMSA proposes to amend Sec.  173.401(b)(4) to
specify that Sec.  173.401 does not apply to all natural material and
ores containing naturally-occurring radionuclides regardless of the
intended use, provided the activity concentration of the material does
not exceed 10 times the exempt material activity concentration values
specified in Sec.  173.436, or as determined in accordance with the
requirements of Sec.  173.433. Currently, only natural materials and
ores processed for purposes other than extraction of the radionuclides
are excepted in Sec.  173.401(b). As written, the HMR treats identical
radioactive materials differently based on the intended use and not the
hazard presented. Second, PHMSA proposes to revise Sec.  173.401(b)(2)
to provide an exception for a person being transported for medical
treatment because of accidental or deliberate intake of radioactive
material, or because of contamination. Currently, Sec.  173.401
provides an exception from subpart I for radioactive materials
implanted into people or animals for diagnosis or treatment, but not
for radioactive material present in or on an individual due to
contamination. The second proposed amendment would address these
additional circumstances and facilitate the transportation of people
and their effects--such as clothing or other items on their person--who
have been contaminated and need to be transported for medical
treatment.
     Surface Contaminated Object--III (SCO-III): PHMSA proposes
to revise the definition for ``Surface Contaminated Object'' (SCO) in
Sec.  173.403 to include ``SCO-III.'' This new form of surface
contaminated object is meant for large solid objects (e.g., a steam
generator, reactor coolant pump, pressurizer, or reactor head
component, etc.) that cannot be transported in a package. The
requirements for transporting SCO-III material are proposed in Sec.
173.427. Currently, such shipments can only be transported using a DOT
special permit.
     Aging of Packages: PHMSA proposes to amend Sec.  173.410
to require package manufacturers to consider the effects of aging
during the design process. The proposed language requires manufacturers
to evaluate the potential degradation phenomena over time, such as
corrosion, abrasion, fatigue, crack propagation, changes of material
compositions or mechanical properties due to thermal loadings or
radiation, generation of decomposition gas, as well as their impact on
the functions important to safety. Package engineers already consider
these factors when they design radioactive packages; however, there is
no specific requirement related to the aging of packaging designs. The
codification of

this best practice would help to ensure that radioactive packagings
remain safe throughout their life cycle.
    PHMSA expects that some of the proposed amendments represent
improvements in safety--e.g., transport index limits and packaging
aging--while none would have significant negative impacts on public
safety or the environment. Additionally, PHMSA anticipates safety
benefits from improved compliance related to consistency between
domestic and international regulations. PHMSA solicits comment on the
amendments proposed in this NPRM, specifically the: (1) need for the
proposals, including benefits and costs of those actions; (2) potential
impacts on safety and the environment; impact on environmental justice
and equity; and (3) any other relevant information. In addition, PHMSA
solicits comment regarding approaches to reducing the costs of this
rulemaking while maintaining or increasing safety benefits. In its
preliminary regulatory impact analysis (PRIA), PHMSA concluded that the
aggregate benefits of the amendments proposed in this NPRM justify
their aggregate costs. Nonetheless, PHMSA solicits comment on specific
changes (e.g., greater flexibility for a particular proposal) that
might improve the safe transportation of radioactive materials.

II. Background

    The Federal Hazardous Materials Transportation Act (codified at 49
U.S.C. 5101 et seq.) directs PHMSA to participate in relevant
international standard-setting bodies and encourages alignment of the
HMR with international transport standards consistent with the
promotion of safety and the public interest.\1\ This statutory mandate
reflects the importance of international standard-setting activity when
considering the globalization of commercial transportation of hazardous
materials. Harmonization of the HMR with international transport
standards, as appropriate, can reduce the costs and other burdens of
complying with multiple or inconsistent safety requirements.
Consistency between the HMR and current international standards can
also enhance safety by: (1) ensuring that the HMR is informed by the
latest best practices and lessons learned; (2) improving understanding
of and compliance with pertinent requirements; (3) facilitating the
smooth flow of hazardous materials from their points of origin to their
points of destination, thereby avoiding risks to the public and the
environment from the release of hazardous materials due to delays or
interruptions in the transportation of those materials; and (4)
enabling consistent emergency response procedures in the event of a
hazardous materials incident.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See 49 U.S.C. 5120.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under their respective statutory authorities, PHMSA and the NRC
jointly regulate the transportation of radioactive materials to, from,
and within the United States. In accordance with the 1979 Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) \2\ between DOT and NRC:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 44 FR 38690. A copy of the MOU has been placed in the docket
for this rulemaking at www.regulations.gov.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     PHMSA regulates both shippers and carriers with respect
to:
    [cir] packaging requirements;
    [cir] communication requirements for:
    [ssquf] shipping paper contents;
    [ssquf] package labeling and marking;
    [ssquf] vehicle placarding; and
    [cir] training and emergency response requirements.
     NRC requires its licensees to satisfy requirements to
protect public health and safety, to assure the common defense and
security, and:
    [cir] certifies Type B and fissile material package designs and
approves package quality assurance programs for its licensees;
    [cir] provides technical support to PHMSA and works with PHMSA to
ensure consistency with respect to the transportation of Class 7
(radioactive) materials; and
    [cir] conducts inspections of licensees and an enforcement program
within its jurisdiction to assure compliance with its requirements.
    Historically, PHMSA and NRC--and their predecessor agencies--have,
to the extent practicable, harmonized their respective regulations to
maintain compatibility with the IAEA's regulations. The Safety Series
No. 6, ``Regulations for the Safe Transport of Radioactive Material,''
was first published by IAEA in 1961 and revised in 1964, and again in
1967. On October 4, 1968, DOT adopted harmonizing amendments to the
HMR.\3\ Additional revisions were made by IAEA in 1973 and 1985, and
DOT then codified these revisions in the HMR.\4\ IAEA completed a major
revision to the Safety Series No. 6--renamed ``Regulations for the Safe
Transport of Radioactive Material, 1996 Edition, No. ST-1''--in 1996
and later republished it in 2000 to include minor editorial changes, at
which time the previous designation was changed to ``Regulations for
the Safe Transport of Radioactive Material, 1996 Edition, No. TS-R-1,
(ST-1, Revised).'' On January 26, 2004, PHMSA adopted harmonizing
amendments to the HMR.\5\ Then, on July 11, 2014, PHMSA adopted the
updates of the 2003, 2005 and 2009 editions in the HMR.\6\ Finally, on
January 8, 2015, PHMSA incorporated by reference the 2012 edition of
the SSR,\7\ but did not fully harmonize the HMR's requirements with the
changes made in that edition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 33 FR 14918.
    \4\ 48 FR 10218 (Mar. 10, 1983) and 60 FR 50291 (Sep. 28, 1995).
    \5\ 69 FR 3632.
    \6\ 79 FR 40589.
    \7\ 80 FR 1075.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In this NPRM, PHMSA proposes to amend the HMR to align with the
sections of 2012 SSR-6 the HMR do not currently harmonize with and 2018
SSR-6, (Rev. 1), which includes changes made to the IAEA regulations
since PHMSA's rulemaking in 2014.\8\ Furthermore, PHMSA proposes to
incorporate by reference 2018 SSR-6, (Rev. 1) and the 2012 and 2019
editions of ANSI N14.1: Uranium Hexafluoride--Packaging for Transport.
Additionally, PHMSA proposes regulatory amendments identified through
internal regulatory review processes to update, clarify, correct, or
streamline certain regulatory requirements applicable to the
transportation of Class 7 (radioactive) materials.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 79 FR 40589.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    PHMSA is working closely with NRC in the development of this
rulemaking and anticipates that NRC will publish a parallel rulemaking.
PHMSA and NRC will coordinate the development and publication schedules
for the final rules and, if necessary, PHMSA may issue a supplemental
notice of proposed rulemaking to ensure that the DOT and NRC rules are
compatible.
    This NPRM addresses only the areas for which DOT has jurisdiction
as defined in the MOU with NRC. Comments responding to any parallel NRC
NPRM should be submitted in accordance with the public participation
guidelines established by NRC in 10 CFR part 2 subpart H.

III. Incorporation by Reference Discussion Under 1 CFR Part 51

    According to the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) Circular
A-119, ``Federal Participation in the Development and Use of Voluntary
Consensus Standards and in Conformity Assessment Activities,''
government agencies must use voluntary consensus standards wherever
practical in the development of regulations.
    PHMSA currently incorporates by reference into the HMR all or the

relevant parts of several standards and specifications developed and
published by standard development organizations (SDO). In general, SDOs
update and revise their published standards every two to five years to
reflect modern technology and best technical practices. The National
Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA; Pub. L. 104-
113) directs Federal agencies to use standards developed by voluntary
consensus standards bodies in lieu of government-written standards
unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise
impracticable. Voluntary consensus standards bodies develop, establish,
or coordinate technical standards using agreed-upon procedures. OMB
issued Circular A-119 to implement section 12(d) of the NTTAA relative
to the utilization of consensus technical standards by Federal
agencies. This circular provides guidance for agencies participating in
voluntary consensus standards bodies and describes procedures for
satisfying the reporting requirements in the NTTAA. Consistent with the
requirements of the NTTAA and its statutory authorities, PHMSA is
responsible for determining which standards should be updated, revised,
removed, or added to the HMR. Revisions to materials incorporated by
reference in the HMR are handled via the rulemaking process, which
allows the public and regulated entities to provide input. During the
rulemaking process, PHMSA must also obtain approval from the Office of
the Federal Register to incorporate by reference any new materials.
Regulations of the Office of the Federal Register require that agencies
detail in the preamble of an NPRM the ways the materials it proposes to
incorporate by reference are reasonably available to interested
parties, or how the agency worked to make those materials reasonably
available to interested parties. (See 1 CFR 51.5.)
    PHMSA proposes to incorporate by reference ``Specific Safety
Requirements Number SSR-6, Revision 1: Regulations for the Safe
Transport of Radioactive Material 2018 Edition'' (2018 SSR-6, Rev. 1)
and the 2012 and 2019 editions of ANSI N14.1: Uranium Hexafluoride--
Packaging for Transport. A summary and discussion of these standards
can be found in ``V. Section-by-Section Review'' under Sec.  171.7. The
IAEA regulations are free and easily accessible to the public on the
internet, with access provided through the parent organization website
at: https://www.iaea.org/publications/12288/regulations-for-the-safe-transport-of-radioactive-material. The 2012 and 2019 editions of ANSI
N14.1 are available for purchase on the ANSI website at: https://webstore.ansi.org/Standards/PCC/ANSIN142012 and https://webstore.ansi.org/Standards/PCC/ANSIN142019 respectively.

IV. Overview of Proposed Amendments

    PHMSA proposes amendments to the HMR based on updates to the 2012
and 2018 editions of the IAEA Safety Standards: 2012 SSR-6 and 2018
SSR-6, Rev. 1. As proposed, the amendments would continue to maintain
compatibility between the HMR and the IAEA regulations. PHMSA does not
intend to make the HMR identical to the IAEA regulations but, rather,
to remove or avoid potential barriers to international commerce while
adhering to domestic law, reflecting domestic practices, and
maintaining public health and safety. Accordingly, PHMSA is not
proposing to adopt all the recent updates into the HMR because the
framework or structure of the HMR may make adoption unnecessary or
impractical. In such cases, there is no added benefit to safety that
might outweigh the impracticality of adoption.

A. Amendments To Harmonize With the 2012 SSR-6 and 2018 SSR-6, Rev. 1

    In consideration of updates in 2012 SSR-6 and 2018 SSR-6, Rev. 1,
PHMSA proposes to amend the HMR as follows:
     Revise paragraph Sec.  171.7(s) to incorporate by
reference the revised 2018 SSR-6, Rev. 1 into the HMR.
     Revise Sec.  172.101 to add the new SCO-III, so that the
proper shipping name of UN2913 reads ``Radioactive Material, surface
contaminated objects (SCO-I, SCO-II, or SCO-III) in the Hazardous
Materials Table (HMT).
     Add new language to Sec.  172.203(d)(4) and (5) to allow
for the label type and transport index of overpacks to be listed on
shipping papers.
     Clarify Sec.  172.310 to state that markings on a package
that do not relate to the material in the package must be removed or
covered before shipment.
     Add a provision to Sec.  173.401(b)(2) to include persons
contaminated by radioactive material transported for medical treatment.
     Add a new term ``dose rate'' in Sec.  173.403.
     Revise the definition of Low specific activity (LSA)
material in Sec.  173.403 to remove the leaching prevention requirement
for LSA-III material.
     Revise the definition of Special Form Class 7
(radioactive) in Sec.  173.403 to adopt a newer standard for the design
of these materials.
     Revise the definition of Surface Contaminated Object (SCO)
in Sec.  173.403 to add a new SCO-III material.
     Revise Sec.  173.410(i)(3) to require that all Class 7
materials--not just liquids--be capable of withstanding an internal
pressure that produces a pressure differential of not less than the
maximum normal operating pressure plus 95 kPa.
     Add a new paragraph (j) to Sec.  173.410 to require that
aging be considered when designing packages for Class 7 materials.
     Amend Sec.  173.417(a) to allow the import and export of
fissile material packages that meet IAEA requirements for criticality
safety index control without package certification by Competent
Authorities.
     Add requirements to Sec.  173.427 for the new SCO-III
materials, including a new Sec.  173.427(d) to require vehicles
transporting the new SCO-III materials be properly surveyed for
residual radioactivity after each shipment.
     Add a new paragraph (i) to Sec.  173.433 to allow a
stakeholder to apply for an approval to allow certain instruments or
articles to have an alternative activity limit.
     Add seven new radionuclides to the Table of A1
and A2 values for radionuclides. in Sec.  173.435.
     Add seven new radionuclides to the Table of Exempt
material activity concentrations and exempt consignment activity limits
for radionuclides in Sec.  173.436.
     Add reference in Sec.  173.443 to the new Sec.  173.427(d)
to require vehicles transporting the new SCO-III materials be properly
surveyed for residual radioactivity after each shipment.
     Revise Sec.  173.448 to require overpacks to be marked
with the name and address of the consigner and consignee if this
information cannot be seen on the packages.
     Amend Sec.  173.453(d) to add another condition to the
existing exception to require fissile material be distributed
homogeneously and not form a lattice arrangement within the package.
     Add a new paragraph (g) to Sec.  173.453 to allow a
fissile material exception for packages containing up to 3.5 grams of
uranium-235 where the uranium-235 is not more than 5 percent of the
material.
     Add a new paragraph (h) to Sec.  173.453 to allow an
exception for up to 140 grams fissile nuclides when shipped under
exclusive use.
     Add a new paragraph (j) to Sec.  173.475 to require proper
maintenance of shipments of Class 7 materials while in storage.

B. Other Proposed Amendments

    In addition to the amendments proposed for harmonization with 2012
SSR-6 and 2018 SSR-6, Rev. 1, PHMSA proposes the following regulatory
amendments identified through internal regulatory review processes to
update, clarify, correct, or streamline certain regulatory requirements
applicable to the transportation of Class 7 (radioactive) materials:
     Revise paragraph (d) of Sec.  171.7 to remove reference to
Sec.  173.417 and add the 2012 and 2019 editions of ANSI N14.1: Uranium
Hexafluoride--Packaging for Transport.
     Amend the Sec.  172.101 HMT to remove the reference to
Sec.  173.427 from columns 8B and 8C for ``UN2978, Radioactive
material, uranium hexafluoride.''
     Amend Sec.  172.102(c)(1) to remove the reference to Sec.
173.472, which is proposed to be deleted.
     Amend paragraph (d) of Sec.  172.203 to require a list of
the fissile nuclides contained in a package be included on a shipping
paper.
     Add new language to Sec.  173.415 to clarify documentation
requirements.
     Add new language to Sec.  173.417 to provide a provision
for fissile material when offered for import or export.
     Add new language to Sec.  173.420 to reference Sec.
173.477 which is the relevant packaging section for the material.
     Add new language to Sec.  173.420 to reference Sec.  171.7
where American National Standard N14.1 is referenced.
     Revise Sec.  173.424 to correct a referenced section and
allow transport of packages that contain fissile material only if
excepted by Sec.  173.453.
     Revise Sec.  173.431(b) to remove the reference to Sec.
173.472, which is proposed to be deleted.
     Add a clarification to footnote ``b'' of Sec.  173.436 to
state that in the case of Th-natural, the parent nuclide is Th-232, and
in the case of U-natural the parent nuclide is U-238.
     Add a new paragraph to Sec.  173.447. Paragraph (b) will
be redesignated as (c), and new paragraph (b) will be added, which will
limit groups of Class 7 (radioactive) packages to a transport index of
50 and require a minimum distance of 6 meters (20ft) between groups of
packages.
     Remove Sec.  173.472 because Type B packages were
previously removed from the HMR.
     Revise the leakage and contamination sections of the
modal-specific requirements, specifically--Sec. Sec.  174.750, 175.705,
176.715, and 177.843--to reference the existing Sec.  173.443(e).

C. Amendments Not Being Considered for Proposal

    PHMSA is not proposing to adopt all the updates made to the IAEA
regulations since 2012 into the HMR. In many cases, amendments to the
IAEA standards are not proposed for adoption because the framework or
structure of the HMR makes adoption unnecessary or impractical. Below
is a listing of significant amendments to the IAEA regulations made
since PHMSA's 2014 rulemaking that are not being proposed for adoption
at this time.
     PHMSA is not replacing the term ``radiation level'' with
``dose rate'' throughout the HMR because the term ``dose rate'' is
already used in the HMR as a synonym for ``radiation level.'' Instead,
PHMSA proposes to add a definition for ``dose rate'' that will
duplicate the current HMR definition for ``radiation level.''
     PHMSA is not adopting all of the changes in the IAEA
fissile material exceptions in SSR-6 paragraphs 417 and 674 for
material shipped with beryllium, hydrogenous material enriched in
deuterium, graphite, and other allotropic forms of carbon (except for
international shipments), and paragraph 675, which exempted certain
plutonium shipments from some packaging requirements. Instead, PHMSA
proposes to adopt changes consistent with the changes that NRC has
identified in the Regulatory Basis for NRC Docket 2016-0179.

V. Section-by-Section Review

A. Part 171

Section 171.7
    Section 171.7 provides a listing of all voluntary consensus
standards incorporated by reference into the HMR. PHMSA proposes to
incorporate by reference ``Specific Safety Requirements Number SSR-6,
Revision 1: Regulations for the Safe Transport of Radioactive Material
2018 Edition'' (2018 SSR-6, Rev. 1) and the 2012 and 2019 editions of
ANSI N14.1: Uranium Hexafluoride--Packaging for Transport. IAEA's SSR-6
Rev.1 regulates the transportation of radioactive materials
internationally. PHMSA evaluated the updated standards and determined
that the revisions provide an enhanced level of safety without imposing
significant compliance burdens. These standards have well-established
and documented safety histories, and their adoption will maintain the
high safety standard currently achieved under the HMR.
    Therefore, PHMSA proposes to add or revise the following
incorporation by reference materials:
     In paragraph (d), remove reference to Sec.  173.417 and
incorporate by reference the 2012 and 2019 editions of ANSI N14.1:
Uranium Hexafluoride--Packaging for Transport in addition to the
versions currently listed in Sec.  171.7(d). PHMSA proposes to remove
the reference to Sec.  173.417 from this paragraph because Sec.
173.417 does not reference the ANSI N14.1 standard. The language in
Sec.  173.417 pertains to shipments of less than 0.1 kg of uranium
hexafluoride while ANSI N14.1 only pertains to shipments exceeding 0.1
kg and those requirements are found in the other listed section, see
Sec.  173.420. The new editions of ANSI N14.1 provide criteria for
packaging uranium hexafluoride for transportation and cover design and
fabrication of the packaging, service inspection requirements,
cleanliness, maintenance requirements, and cylinder loading
requirements. PHMSA has incorporated this standard in its regulations
since 1971, and it remains the industry standard for shipping uranium
hexafluoride. The changes from the 2001 version to the proposed 2019
version include requirements for the use of ``plugs'' that were not
previously allowed and provisions for converting imperial units to
metric, as well as harmonization with the 2018 SSR-6, Rev. 1 and
additional best practices including incorporating standards from ASTM
International. PHMSA believes that the 2019 edition adds an increased
level of safety by bringing in updated safety requirements, while
allowing more flexibility in packaging. While the 2019 edition of ANSI
N14.1 will be the required standard for new uranium hexafluoride
packages, older packages may remain in service provided that repairs,
markings, and periodic tests and inspections comply with the 2019
edition. The changes to the inspection, testing, and repair
requirements between the 2001 and 2019 editions are largely formatting
changes, and PHMSA does not believe that the revisions will necessitate
the removal of existing packaging from circulation. Further, by
incorporating both the proposed editions, packages built to the 2012
edition will be permitted in accordance with Sec.  173.420. However,
new packages will still need to be manufactured to the 2019 standard.
The ANSI N14.1: Uranium Hexafluoride--Packaging for Transport 2012 and
2019 editions are available for purchase at the following websites:

 2012 Edition: https://webstore.ansi.org/standards/pcc/
ansin142012
 2019 Edition: https://webstore.ansi.org/standards/pcc/
ansin142019

     In paragraph (s)(1), incorporate by reference the 2018
edition of the IAEA Regulations for the Safe Transport of Radioactive
Material, Safety Standards Series No. SSR-6 (Rev.1), to replace the
2012 edition, which is currently referenced in Sec. Sec.  171.22;
171.23; 171.26; 173.415; 173.416; 173.417; 173.435; and 173.473. The
IAEA regulations establish standards of safety for control of the
radiation, criticality, and thermal hazards to people, property, and
the environment associated with the transport of radioactive materials.
Notable changes from the previous edition include clarification of
marking requirements, a new group of surface contaminated objects (SCO-
III) for UN2913, and amendments to basic radionuclide values (activity
of the radionuclide as listed in Sec.  173.435) for seven specific
radionuclides (Ba-135m, Ge-69, Ir-193m, Ni-57, Sr-83, Tb-149 and Tb-
161). The Regulations for the Safe Transport of Radioactive Material
are available for download and purchase in hard copy on the IAEA
website at: https://www.iaea.org/publications/12288/regulations-for-the-safe-transport-of-radioactive-material.

B. Part 172

Section 172.101 HMT
    The HMT provides the terms and conditions governing transportation
of hazardous materials under the HMR. For each entry, the HMT
identifies information such as the proper shipping name, UN
identification number, and hazard class. The HMT specifies additional
information or reference requirements in the HMR such as hazard
communication, packaging, quantity limits aboard aircraft, and stowage
of hazardous materials aboard vessels. PHMSA proposes to revise the
entry for ``UN2978, Radioactive material, uranium hexafluoride'' to
remove the reference to Sec.  173.427, and revise the entry for
``UN2913, Radioactive material, surface contaminated objects (SCO-I or
SCO-II)'' to add the new SCO-III material.
    In the July 11, 2014, final rule,\9\ PHMSA added paragraph (e) to
Sec.  173.420, which details additional shipping requirements for
shipments of Uranium hexafluoride (UF6) and requires the UN
number and proper shipping name--``UN2978, Radioactive material,
uranium hexafluoride''--to be used for packages containing 0.1 kg or
more of non-fissile or fissile-excepted UF6. Paragraph (e)
was added to clarify that ``when there is more than one way to describe
a UF6 shipment, the proper shipping name and UN number for
the uranium hexafluoride should take precedence over the shipping
description for LSA material.'' However, PHMSA inadvertently failed to
remove the reference to Sec.  173.427 (regarding, in relevant part,
transport requirements for LSA material) from the non-bulk and bulk
packaging provisions in the 2014 final rule. The HMT entry for
``UN2978'' should reference only Sec.  173.420 (regarding requirements
for uranium hexafluoride). Compliance with the HMT as written could
result in the use of an incorrect packaging provision, a safety concern
that could lead to a dangerous situation. Therefore, PHMSA proposes to
amend the entry for ``UN2978, Radioactive material, uranium
hexafluoride'' to remove the reference to Sec.  173.427 and ensure
proper packaging is used and safety is maintained.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 81 FR 40590.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, PHMSA proposes to change the parenthetical text in
the entry for ``UN2913, Radioactive material, surface contaminated
objects (SCO-I or SCO-II)'' to read ``(SCO-I or SCO-II or SCO-III).''
This change is consistent with the addition of the new SCO-III material
discussed in this NPRM. See SECTIONS 173.403 and 173.427 of the
Section-by-Section Review for further details on this proposed change.
Section 172.102 Special Provisions
    Section 172.102 lists special provisions applicable to the
transportation of specific hazardous materials and contains various
provisions including packaging requirements, prohibitions, and
exceptions applicable to particular quantities or forms of such
hazardous materials. PHMSA proposes to amend special provision 139 to
remove the reference to Sec.  173.472 because in this NPRM, PHMSA
proposes to remove Sec.  173.472 from the HMR. See Section 173.472 of
the Section-by-Section Review for further details.
Section 172.203
    Section 172.203 prescribes additional requirements for shipping
descriptions on shipping papers. Paragraph (d) lists information that
must be included in the description of a Class 7 (radioactive)
material, such as the category of label applied to a package as
referenced in paragraph (d)(4). PHMSA proposes to revise paragraphs
(d)(4) and (5) by adding the words ``or overpack'' to those paragraphs.
This proposed change would allow shippers to list the label and the sum
of the transport indices of the overpack on the shipping paper, instead
of the individual packages. PHMSA believes that this change would
provide cost savings without compromising safety by reducing the time
it takes for an offeror to fill out a shipping paper. This change would
also harmonize with the IAEA standards and account for the common use
of overpacks for shipping Class 7 (radioactive) materials.
    Additionally, PHMSA proposes to revise paragraph (d)(6) to require
shipping papers for shipments containing fissile Class 7 (radioactive)
material to list the nuclides of the fissile material in the package.
This proposed change would provide information on which fissile
nuclides are present in the package--e.g., plutonium-239, plutonium-
241, uranium-233, or uranium-235--but would only affect shipments where
the fissile nuclides are not listed on the shipping paper in accordance
with the requirements of Sec.  173.433(g), and the fissile materials
are not excepted under Sec.  173.453. As the HMR is currently written,
it is possible that such a package could be assigned a criticality
safety index (CSI), but have no fissile nuclides listed on the shipping
paper as it does not meet the threshold set out in Sec.  173.433. A CSI
is assigned to fissile materials using a calculation in 10 CFR part 71
to provide control over the accumulation of packages, overpacks, or
freight containers containing fissile material. As this may lead to
confusion in transportation and possibly delay shipments, we have
proposed this revision to paragraph (d)(6).
Section 172.310
    Section 172.310 prescribes marking requirements for packages
containing Class 7 (radioactive) materials. Specifically, paragraph (b)
requires that each industrial, Type A, Type B(U), or Type B(M) package
must be legibly and durably marked on the outside of the packaging.
PHMSA proposes to make a revision to paragraph (b) which clarifies the
existing requirement to remove markings that do not correspond with the
package being shipped. For example, if an offeror's package meets the
requirements for a Type A package and radioactive materials are then
removed, any markings identifying the package as a Type A package must
be removed or covered. Improperly labeled packages misrepresent the
hazard present in the package, which could lead to potentially
dangerous situations, especially if the label underrepresents the
hazard present. This proposed clarification will increase compliance
and decrease the likelihood of a dangerous situation occurring, thus

improving the safe transportation of these packages.
    Additionally, PHMSA proposes to revise paragraph (e) to remove
reference to Sec.  173.472 to reflect the proposal to remove Sec.
173.472 from the HMR. See Section 173.472 of the Section-by-Section
Review for further details.

C. Part 173

Section 173.401
    Section 173.401 contains the scope of subpart I of Part 173 of the
HMR, including situations that are excepted from the requirements of
subpart I. Sub-paragraph 107(d) of the IAEA regulations contains an
exception for radioactive material in--or on--a person who is to be
transported for medical treatment because of accidental or deliberate
radiation intake or contamination. Currently, Sec.  173.401(b)(2) of
the HMR provides an exception from subpart I of Part 173 for
radioactive material implanted into people or animals for diagnosis or
treatment, but not from contamination. Therefore, PHMSA proposes to add
a new paragraph (b)(6) for a medical exception to Sec.  173.401, which
would facilitate the transportation of people and their effects--such
as clothing or other items on their person--who have been contaminated
and need to be transported for medical treatment.
    Additionally, PHMSA proposes to revise Sec.  173.401(b)(4) to
specify that Sec.  173.401 does not apply to all natural material and
ores containing naturally occurring radionuclides, regardless of its
intended use, provided the activity concentration of the material does
not exceed 10 times the exempt material activity concentration values
specified in Sec.  173.436, or determined in accordance with the
requirements of Sec.  173.433. Currently, only natural material and ore
containing naturally occurring radionuclides--which are either in their
natural state or which have only been processed for purposes other than
extraction of the radionuclides--are excepted from subpart I of Part
173 in Sec.  173.401(b). Material intended to be processed for the use
of the radionuclides may not utilize the exception. As written, the HMR
treats identical radioactive material differently based on its intended
use and not the hazard it presents. This change maintains the existing
activity concentration limit of 10 times the exempt material activity
concentration values specified in Sec.  173.436 meaning the hazard
level of the material exempted cannot exceed what is already permitted.
Therefore, this proposed change would harmonize with the scope of the
IAEA regulations and reflect that the hazards of naturally occurring
radionuclides do not differ based on the reason for processing or their
future intended use.
Section 173.403
    Section 173.403 provides the definitions for subpart I of Part 173.
PHMSA proposes to revise various definitions to better harmonize with
2018 SSR-6, Rev. 1. The proposed changes are as follows:
     Add ``dose rate'' as a new definition.
     Revise the definition of ``Special form Class 7
(radioactive) material'' to align with SSR-6, paragraph 823.
     Revise the definition of ``Low Specific Activity (LSA)
material'' to remove the leaching prevention requirement for LSA-III
materials.
     Revise the definition of ``Surface Contaminated Object
(SCO)'' to include the SCO-III material introduced in this NPRM.
    The details of these proposed changes are explained below.
    Dose rate: A new definition of ``dose rate'' is being added to
clarify the term as it is used in the HMR. In past alignment with the
IAEA, ``dose rate'' has been used throughout the HMR as a term that was
meant to be synonymous with ``radiation level''--and until recently,
the two terms have been used interchangeably. However, the IAEA has
decided to exclusively use the term ``dose rate'' specified in 2018
SSR-6, Rev. 1. PHMSA and NRC have decided not to harmonize with that
change because it would not result in a change in practice or safety
but recognize that the use of two terms interchangeably without
defining ``dose rate'' can be confusing to some readers. Therefore, to
avoid confusion and provide greater clarity, PHMSA proposes to add a
definition for ``dose rate'' that will reference the definition of
``radiation level.''
    Special form Class 7 (radioactive) material: PHMSA proposes to
revise the definition of ``Special form Class 7 (radioactive)
material'' to align with changes adopted by the IAEA. Specifically,
paragraph 823 of the 2018 SSR-6, Rev. 1:
     Prohibits continued use of special form radioactive
material approved under the 1973 IAEA regulations, incorporated into
the HMR in 1983.
     Prohibits new manufacture of special form radioactive
material that received approval under the 1985 IAEA regulations,
incorporated into the HMR in 1996.
     After December 31, 2025, the 2018 SSR-6, Rev. 1 prohibits
new manufacture of special form radioactive material sources to a
design that had received approval under the 1996 edition of the IAEA
regulations, incorporated into the HMR in 2004.
    Under this proposal, manufacturers of designs that conform to the
requirements of the HMR--that were effective between April 1, 1996, and
the effective date of any final rule--may continue to use those designs
provided they maintain a management system as required by SSR-6 (Rev.
1) paragraph 306. Manufacturers of older designs may be able to obtain
new competent authority approvals for these designs because there have
been no significant changes to the special form requirements since the
IAEA 1985 regulations. For special forms approved under the pre-1985
IAEA requirements, no new manufacture has been authorized under the HMR
since April 1, 1997, and those special form sources would all lack a
quality assurance program that meets Sec.  173.476(c)(4) requirements.
    This proposed revision to the definition of ``Special form Class 7
(radioactive) material'' would phase out the oldest special form Class
7 (radioactive) material designs that do not meet current design
requirements; however, it would continue to allow more recent designs
to remain, provided a management system is maintained. This approach
will increase safety by: (1) removing the oldest special form Class 7
(radioactive) materials from circulation that are at a minimum 24 years
old; and (2) adding additional safety requirements to certain designs
that remain in use. The following table provides a summary of these
proposed changes:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Can I continue to
         Year of design  (IAEA)            Year adopted   manufacture to this design  Can I continue to use this
                                              by DOT                 year?                      design?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1973....................................            1983  No........................  No.
1985....................................            1996  No........................  Yes.
1996....................................            2004  Yes, through December 31,   Yes.
                                                           2025.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Low Specific Activity (LSA) material: PHMSA proposes to amend the
definition of LSA material by removing the leaching prevention
requirement for LSA-III materials and removing the reference to Sec.
173.468. LSA is material with limited specific activity that is not
fissile material or excepted under Sec.  173.453. Specifically, LSA-III
is solid material--excluding powders--with an average specific activity
that does not exceed 2x10-3 A2/g, excluding any
shielding material. Currently, LSA-III materials must also pass a
leaching test, and the contamination must be uniformly distributed.
When establishing the low average specific activity limits for LSA
material in the transport regulations, IAEA based its analysis on the
small likelihood that, under normal conditions of transportation, a
sufficient mass of such material could be taken into the body and
result in a significant radiation hazard. For the 2018 SSR-6, IAEA's
working group evaluated \10\ the need for the leaching test used to
demonstrate that the leaching prevention requirement is met, as it had
no apparent relevance to the inhalation risk of exposure to material
during transportation and determined that the leaching test for LSA-III
material did not contribute to IAEA's 50 mSv effective dose transport
safety limit. PHMSA agrees with IAEA's findings that the leaching test
does not enhance safety and proposes to harmonize with the 2018 SSR-6,
Rev. 1 by removing the leaching prevention requirement from this
section.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ A summary of the working group's conclusions is included in
the rulemaking docket.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Surface Contaminated Object (SCO) III: PHMSA proposes to add a new
section to the definition for ``Surface Contaminated Objects'' to
create a type called ``Surface Contaminated Object--III.'' This new
form of surface contaminated object is meant for large solid objects
(e.g., a steam generator, reactor coolant pump, pressurizer, or reactor
head component, etc.) that cannot be transported in a package.
Currently, such shipments require the application for--and granting
of--a DOT special permit.\11\ This proposed change would codify the
requirements for the transportation of these shipments and remove the
need for a special permit, replacing it with an approval which take
less time and require less effort from the requestor due to the
codified requirements. This approach allows for a more efficient
transportation environment without any decrease in safety as PHMSA will
retain the ability to reject applications that it deems unsafe.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ PHMSA worked with our Canadian partners to redo a 2007
proposal for the adoption of SCO-III material into the IAEA
regulations. Further, PHMSA used the experience and information we
gained from developing the special permits and--along with our
Canadian partners--developed a new proposal for SCO-III materials.
That proposal was submitted to the IAEA by Canada and ultimately
accepted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Section 173.410
    Section 173.410 prescribes general design requirements for packages
used for the transportation of Class 7 (radioactive) materials. In this
NPRM, PHMSA proposes two separate changes to this section.
    Paragraph (i) prescribes requirements for air transport only. PHMSA
proposes to revise paragraph (i)(3) to require that all packages for
transport by air must be able to withstand an internal pressure that
produces a pressure differential of not less than the maximum normal
operating pressure plus 95 kPa (13.8 psi). Because the HMR currently
limits the provision in paragraph (i)(3) to liquid materials, this
change would expand the requirement to all radioactive materials. This
proposed change would not only harmonize the HMR with both the
International Civil Aviation Organization Technical Instructions (ICAO
TI) and IAEA regulations, but it would also increase safety by ensuring
that all packages containing radioactive material shipped by air are
capable of withstanding the pressure changes inherent in air transport.
This provision has been implemented by ICAO for all international air
carriers, and therefore PHMSA believes it is widely adopted already.
However, we request comment on this assumption.
    PHMSA acknowledges that NRC has chosen not to harmonize with the
2018 SSR-6, Rev. 1, and the ICAO TI by omitting the requirements of
Sec.  173.410(i)(3) from its proposed rulemaking. NRC believes that the
existing reduced external pressure test value--which requires packages
to be tested to an external pressure of 25 kPa (3.5 LbF/in\2\) \12\
absolute--addresses air transport conditions and that Type AF and Type
B packages are adequately robust compared to Type A packages. PHMSA
requests comments on whether this disparity--between the PHMSA NPRM and
the NRC NPRM--will have any negative effects on stakeholders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ LbF is a unit of measurement and means ``Pounds Force.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, PHMSA proposes to add a new paragraph (j) that will
require package manufacturers to take the effects of aging into
consideration during the design process. The proposed new paragraph (j)
will require the package designer to evaluate the potential degradation
phenomena over time, such as corrosion, abrasion, fatigue, crack
propagation, changes of material compositions or mechanical properties
due to thermal loadings or radiation, generation of decomposition gas,
and their impact on the functions important to safety. While PHMSA
believes package engineers already take these factors into
consideration when they design radioactive packages, there is no
specific requirement related to the aging of packaging designs. The
codification of this best practice would ensure that radioactive
packaging designs remain safe into the future, while also harmonizing
the HMR with the IAEA standards to facilitate uniform international
packaging standards and, therefore, international commerce.
Section 173.415
    Section 173.415 lists the Type A packages that are authorized for
shipment, provided that the packages do not contain quantities
exceeding the A1 or A2 values for radionuclides
in Sec.  173.435. Paragraph (a) specifies the DOT Specification 7A Type
A recordkeeping requirements, and PHMSA proposes to revise three
subparagraphs in paragraph (a) to better clarify them.
    First, PHMSA proposes to revise Sec.  173.415(a)(1) to better
clarify ``a description of the package.'' PHMSA proposes to add
language requiring that the report detail the radionuclide(s) tested
for use in the package, the radionuclide(s) chemical state (i.e.,
solid, liquid, or gas), and an indication as to whether the material is
special form. This proposed change would increase safety by ensuring
packages are tested for the materials they contain.
    Second, PHMSA proposes to add language in Sec.  173.415(a)(1)(i) to
require test reports to describe how the test conditions met the
requirements of Sec.  173.461(a)(1). Section 173.461 describes the
methods that can be used to demonstrate compliance with the tests
required for Type A packages in Sec.  173.465. Specifically, paragraph
(a)(1) allows testing to be done with prototypes or samples of
specimens representing LSA-III special form Class 7 (radioactive)
material or packaging, in which case the contents of the packaging for
the test must simulate as closely as practicable the expected range of
physical properties of the radioactive contents or packaging to be
tested. It also encourages testers to use non-radioactive materials
when testing. Due to this flexibility, PHMSA proposes a requirement for
testers to describe

specifically how the test was carried out so that it can easily be
determined if the package in question is acceptable for its intended
contents. This increased transparency in the testing process will have
a positive effect on safety by allowing investigators to better
understand the testing that took place and determine if it was
performed correctly. Furthermore, PHMSA also proposes to add a
reference to Sec.  173.412(j) in Sec.  173.415(a)(1)(i) to further
clarify that the records maintained must show compliance with Sec.
173.412(j). These proposed changes will provide greater clarity by
removing the need for package manufacturers to interpret a ``detailed
description.''
    Third, PHMSA proposes to revise Sec.  173.415(a)(2) to allow
offerors who obtained packagings from a packaging manufacturer--and
were provided with a certification for those packagings--the option to
contact the packaging manufacturer and have the packaging manufacturer
send the documents required in paragraph (a)(1) to DOT, rather than
requiring the offeror to maintain the documents required by paragraph
(a)(1) on file. This proposed change would conform to PHMSA's stated
intent in the 2014 final rule.\13\ Additionally, PHMSA proposes to
revise the language in paragraph (a)(2) to require certification that
the packaging meets all the requirements of Sec. Sec.  173.403,
173.410, 173.412, 173.465, and, if applicable, Sec.  173.466, instead
of Sec.  178.350. Section 178.350 requires packagings to meet the
requirements of those listed sections. These proposed changes will
clarify the specific requirements that PHMSA expects packaging
manufacturers certify their packagings to.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 79 FR 40589 (July 11, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Section 173.417
    Section 173.417 provides a list of authorized fissile materials
packages. PHMSA proposes to add a new subparagraph (a)(2)(ii) for the
import and export of fissile material packages that meet the
requirements of paragraph 674 of SSR-6, and to reorganize paragraph (a)
to more clearly outline when the various packagings are allowed.
Paragraph 674 provides criteria by which fissile material may be
transported using a package design that does not require certification
by a competent authority to contain fissile material. Rather, if the
mass of fissile nuclides is limited to the quantities specified in
paragraph 674 and the package meets the performance criteria noted in
paragraph 674(a)-(c), then the package would be safe for transport
subject to criticality safety index accumulation control. PHMSA
proposes to add language to highlight and clarify the acceptable use of
this IAEA exception by listing it in the authorized fissile material
packages section. This change will align PHMSA with the IAEA standards
and provide a way for packages that meet these criteria to be shipped
to and from the US.
Section 173.420
    Section 173.420 prescribes requirements for transportation of
uranium hexafluoride (fissile, fissile-excepted, and non-fissile).
PHMSA proposes to add a new paragraph (f) to direct offerors who are
shipping more than 0.1 kg of non-fissile or fissile-excepted uranium
hexafluoride to Sec.  173.477. This proposed change would aid offerors
in finding the specific requirements for their materials in the HMR,
thus increasing compliance and safety. Separately, PHMSA proposes to
provide an additional reader's aid by adding an incorporation by
reference notation to ANSI N14.1 in this section. PHMSA has also
proposed to update the ANSI N14.1 standards incorporated by reference
in section 171.7. For further information see SECTION 171.7 above.
Section 173.424
    Section 173.424 provides an exception from specification packaging,
labeling, marking (except for the UN identification number marking
requirement described in Sec.  173.422(a)), and--if not a hazardous
substance or hazardous waste--shipping papers, and the requirements of
subpart I (Class 7 (Radioactive) Materials) provided all the conditions
in the section are met. PHMSA proposes to revise paragraph (h) of this
section to make it consistent with a change made to Sec.  173.421 in a
previous final rule.\14\ This proposed change would revise the section
reference from Sec.  173.426 to Sec.  173.453 and remove the exception
for shipments of up to 15 grams of uranium-235. The revised paragraph
would allow for any of the exceptions provided in Sec.  173.453--
including two new ones proposed in this NPRM--to be utilized when
shipping fissile material as excepted packages. While these exceptions
are more stringent than the flat limit of 15 grams of uranium-235, they
allow for multiple volumes from 1 to 180 grams of fissile material--not
only uranium-235--to utilize the excepted packages provisions in this
section.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 70 FR 56083 (Sept. 23, 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Section 173.427
    Section 173.427 provides transport requirements for LSA and SCO
materials. Currently, offerors must obtain a special permit to ship
materials that meet the new definition of SCO-III. PHMSA proposes to
revise this section to add the limits for the newly created SCO-III
material. This proposed change would revise the HMR to clearly state
the requirements for shipping SCO-III materials without the need for a
company to obtain a special permit. Instead, a company will apply for a
less burdensome approval. This process will still require PHMSA to
review the requestor's transport plan to ensure it is safe and within
the requirements of the HMR, thus maintaining the level of safety
achieved by the current system. This proposed change would also align
the HMR with IAEA requirements.
    In order to revise the HMR as described above, PHMSA proposes to
redesignate current paragraph (d) as paragraph (e), redesignate current
paragraph (e) as paragraph (f), and create a new paragraph (d) that
will list the requirements for the transport of SCO-III material. PHMSA
also proposes to require approval by the Associate Administrator of
Hazardous Materials Safety for SCO-III shipments; therefore, paragraph
(d)(6) would prescribe the approval application requirements for SCO-
III shipments. In addition, PHMSA proposes to amend paragraphs (a)(2)
and (a)(6)(i) to provide exceptions for SCO-III material that cannot
meet the transport requirements outlined in these provisions because of
its large physical size, provided certain provisions are included in
the shipment's transport plan.
Section 173.431
    Section 173.431 contains the activity limits for Type A and Type B
packages. In this NPRM, PHMSA proposes to revise paragraph (b) by
removing references to Sec. Sec.  173.416, 173.417, and 173.472. First,
PHMSA proposes to remove Sec.  173.472 in this NPRM as an editorial
edit following deletion in the HM-250 final rule--therefore the
reference to Sec.  173.472 is no longer applicable.\15\ See SECTION
173.472 of the Section-by-Section Review for further details. Second,
PHMSA proposes to remove reference to Sec. Sec.  173.416 and 173.417 as
they are no longer relevant to the activity limits for Type B packages
after the various DOT Type B packages were previously phased out. The
phaseout began in 2004 with the publication of the HM-230

final rule \16\ and was completed by October 1, 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 79 FR 40589 (July 11, 2014).
    \16\ 69 FR 3631 (Jan. 26, 2004).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Section 173.433
    Section 173.433 prescribes requirements for determining basic
radionuclide values and for listing radionuclides on shipping papers
and labels. PHMSA proposes to add a new paragraph (i) that would allow
stakeholders to request an approval to allow certain instruments or
articles to have an alternative activity limit for what is considered
an exempt material instead of those found in the table in Sec.
173.436. Alternative exemption limits of material contained within
instruments or articles may be justified when it is shown that the
construction and design of the item itself provides containment and
shielding of the radionuclide--in both routine and adverse conditions
of transport--to minimize risks. An alternative activity limit would
allow for Class 7 materials transported as component parts of an
instrument or article to be shipped as an exempt material provided both
PHMSA and--for international shipments--other competent authorities
approve. Currently, this practice is permissible only via special
permit. However, the 2018 SSR-6, Rev. 1 codified language to allow a
shipper who transports Class 7 (radioactive) material internationally
to request this exemption. The IAEA requires multilateral approval for
an alternative activity limit shipment meaning an offeror must obtain a
competent authority approval from the design or shipment origin country
as well as any country the shipment will be transported through or
into. PHMSA believes alignment of the HMR with the 2018 SSR-6, Rev. 1
would facilitate international trade and--in fact--U.S. companies may
be at a domestic disadvantage if PHMSA were to not adopt this change
into the HMR.
Section 173.435
    Section 173.435 lists the A1 and A2 values
for the most commonly transported radionuclides in the ``Table of
A1 and A2 values for radionuclides.''
A1 and A2 values are used in the international
and domestic transportation regulations to specify the amount of
radioactive material that is permitted to be transported in a
particular packaging.
    PHMSA proposes to revise the table by adding seven new
radionuclides--Ba-135m, Ge-69, Ir-193m, Ni-57, Sr-83, Tb-149, and Tb-
161)--that the NRC has indicated there is an increased need to ship
(e.g., Ba-135m and Ge-69 for medical uses, etc.). Without provided
values for these radionuclides, the general values given in tables 7
and 8 must be used, which could significantly impact the ability to
transport these radionuclides by either necessitating decay prior to
shipment, the use of multiple Type A Packages, or the use of Type B
packages, as well as leading to possible miscommunication of the
relative hazards. PHMSA has determined these new activity limits are
safe for transportation in specification Type A packaging. This
proposed change would provide a cost savings to offerors of these newly
added radionuclides without a reduction in safety. Adding these seven
new radionuclides will also provide increased clarity about the
products shipped, which will increase safe transport and shipment of
these radionuclides.
    PHMSA also proposes to make an editorial change to the specific
activity values for Rb(nat). Currently, the specific activity values of
6.7 x 10-10 TBq/g and 1.8 x 10-8 Ci/g incorrectly
use an underscore to represent the negative sign. In this NPRM, we are
proposing to revise the specific activity values to correctly show the
appropriate negative sign.
Section 173.436
    Section 173.436 specifies the nuclide-specific exemption
concentrations and the nuclide-specific exemption-consignment activity
limits for radionuclides. As noted above, in order to align with the
2018 SSR-6, Rev. 1, PHMSA proposes to add seven new radionuclides to
this table (Ba-135m, Ge-69, Ir-193m, Ni-57, Sr-83, Tb-149, and Tb-161).
Without provided values for these radionuclides, the general values
given in table 8 must be used, which could significantly impact the
ability to transport these radionuclides by either necessitating decay
prior to shipment, the use of multiple Type A Packages, or the use of
Type B packages.
    Additionally, PHMSA proposes to clarify footnote ``b'' of Sec.
173.436 per table 2 to state that in the case of Th-natural, the parent
nuclide is Th-232; and in the case of U-natural, the parent nuclide is
U-238. This information is not clearly communicated in the footnote as
currently written and may cause frustration in the interpretation of
the HMR.
Section 173.443
    Section 173.443 specifies contamination control limits. PHMSA
proposes to revise paragraph (c) to reference the new paragraph (d)
proposed in Sec.  173.427. This change would amend the requirement for
each conveyance, overpack, freight container, tank, or intermediate
bulk container--used for transporting Class 7 (radioactive) materials
as an exclusive use shipment--to be surveyed with appropriate radiation
detection instruments after each exclusive use transport to include the
new SCO-III materials. By adding the reference to Sec.  173.427(d),
PHMSA is applying the existing contamination control requirements to
the new SCO-III materials. This proposed change would ensure that any
conveyance used to transport SCO-III material is properly surveyed and
decontaminated before returning to general service, and would harmonize
with the IAEA standards, thus ensuring conveyances may easily continue
on in international service safely.
Section 173.447
    Section 173.447 specifies the general requirements for temporary
storage of Class 7 (radioactive) material during the course of
transportation. In 2002--in the HM-230 NPRM \17\--the Research and
Special Programs Administration (RSPA), PHMSA`s precursor agency,
proposed to move certain requirements in Sec.  173.447 to Sec.
173.441(d)(3). These requirements included a limit of 50 on the sum of
transport indexes of groups of packages while in storage incidental to
transportation, and distancing requirements of at least 6 meters or 20
feet. The paragraph enacting those changes was inadvertently omitted in
the HM-230 final rule.\18\ These values have been in place in the IAEA
and other sections of the HMR for over 30 years. Therefore, PHMSA
proposes to reinstate the limit on the sum of transport indexes of a
group of packages and distancing requirements while in storage
incidental to transport as paragraph (b) in Sec.  173.447.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 67 FR 21327 (Apr. 30, 2002).
    \18\ 69 FR 3631 (Jan. 26, 2004).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed requirements are consistent with the various modal
sections of the HMR. For example, parts 174 and 177 for railroad and
highway transportation, respectively, both require that shippers keep
any single group of Class 7 (radioactive) packages in any storage
location limited to a total transport index number of 50. Similarly,
the requirements for air transportation in Sec.  175.700 and vessel
transportation in Sec.  176.704 limit the transportation index to 50 on
passenger aircraft or in freight containers. Additionally, all modes of
transportation require Class 7 (radioactive) materials to maintain a
certain distance from animals, people,

or other Class 7 (radioactive) materials. For example, part 177
requires the proposed distance requirements of 6 meters or 20 feet
between groups of packages. These proposed requirements in Sec.
173.447 for total transport index and distancing would help to ensure
the safety of those who store and handle Class 7 (radioactive)
materials.
Section 173.448
    Section 173.448 contains general transportation requirements for
Class 7 (radioactive) materials. PHMSA proposes to revise this section
to require overpacks to have the consignor and/or consignee marked on
the outside of the overpack if it cannot be seen on the packages. This
proposed change would reduce confusion and increase safety by
identifying the consignee and consignor marking requirements on the
outside of the overpack if they cannot be seen on the individual
packages in the overpack.
Section 173.453
    Section 173.453 contains provisions that allow a material to be
excepted from some requirements for fissile materials. PHMSA proposes
to add a sentence to paragraph (d) that would require materials
utilizing that exception to have fissile material that is distributed
homogenously and that does not form a lattice arrangement. Uranium
enriched to less than five percent (5%) by weight is most reactive when
it is in a heterogeneous configuration. For uranium enriched to not
more than one percent (1%), a large heterogeneous system or lattice
arrangement would be required for a material utilizing this exception
to approach criticality. This proposed change would align the HMR with
the current NRC and IAEA requirements and ensure the safe transport of
such fissile material.
    Additionally, PHMSA proposes to add a new paragraph (g) that would
provide a new exception for up to 3.5 grams of uranium-235 where the
uranium-235 is not more than five percent (5%) of the material. This
new exception is comparable to the 49 CFR 173.453(a) exemption limit of
up to 2.0 grams of fissile material per package. The additional neutron
absorption provided by uranium-238 in 5.0 weight percent enriched
uranium compensates for the additional 1.5 grams of uranium-235 mass
(i.e., up to 3.5 grams uranium-235 per package), when compared to the
49 CFR 173.453(a) limit of 2.0 grams. This proposed change would align
the HMR with the changes that NRC has identified in the Regulatory
Basis for NRC Docket 2016-0179. It would also align the HMR with the
IAEA standards--but without the consignment limit in SSR-6 paragraph
570(c)--and allow the increased transport of uranium-235 without any
additional impacts on safety. PHMSA has decided not to adopt the
consignment limit. The amount of fissile material allowed by this
proposed provision would be similar to the existing exception in 49 CFR
173.453(a)in terms of reactivity. In addition, the consignment limit of
SSR-6 paragraph 570(c) does not affect the accumulation of packages on
a transport conveyance because there is no limit to the number of
consignments that may be present on a single conveyance.
    Finally, PHMSA proposes to add a new paragraph (h) that will
provide an exception for up to 140 grams of fissile nuclides when
shipped under exclusive use. This proposed change would align the HMR
with the changes that NRC has identified in the Regulatory Basis for
NRC Docket 2016-0179, by adopting a modified version of a 45-gram
exception in SSR-6. In evaluating this new exception, NRC staff
determined that the IAEA SSR-6 45-gram exception was unnecessarily
conservative--45 grams represents about one eighth of the consensus
minimum subcritical mass value for plutonium-239 moderated by water.
NRC staff also determined that a mass value higher than that contained
in IAEA SSR-6 paragraph 417(e) is justified, given the conservatism
inherent in the exclusive use restriction of the SSR-6 provision, and
because plutonium-239 would have to be shipped in a Type B package that
withstands hypothetical accident conditions. Therefore, PHMSA and NRC
propose a limit of 140 grams of fissile material. When determining the
proposed limit, NRC considered uranium-235 rather than plutonium-239,
as any amount of plutonium-239 over 0.435 grams is considered Type B,
which would have to be packaged to withstand both normal and
hypothetical accident conditions of transport. This limit is based on
one-fifth of a consensus minimum critical mass of uranium-235 under
optimum conditions. This mass represents a conservative limit for
fissile material, because five times this amount would remain
subcritical under any conditions. PHMSA and NRC anticipate that
shipments utilizing this exception would be used primarily for domestic
transportation (e.g., decommissioning activities where contaminated
items or small quantities of fissile material would be shipped for
disposal), and only rarely for international shipments. In the rare
instances where international shipments under this exemption provision
are necessary, shippers would have to be aware of this difference and
ship under the lower limit in IAEA SSR-6 paragraph 417(e).
Section 173.465
    Section 173.465 contains the test requirements for Type A
packaging. Specifically, paragraph (c) contains the free drop test
requirements. In response to a request from the U.S. Department of
Energy (DOE), PHMSA proposes to revise paragraph (c) to clarify that
the free drop test required by paragraph (c)(2) is applicable only to
fissile material rectangular packages not exceeding 50 kg and fissile
material cylindrical packages not exceeding 100 kg. This proposed
change would align the HMR with the similar NRC requirement in 10 CFR
71.71(c)(8), which was modified in a previous final rule.\19\ NRC
agreed with a comment to that rule that for a large and heavy package,
it is considered highly implausible for a package to undergo a one-foot
corner drop as a normal condition of transport, and that only a free
drop with the package in its normal orientation should be specified as
a normal condition of transport for large and heavy packages. NRC
removed the corner drop test for fiberboard, wood, or fissile material
rectangular packages weighing more than 50 kg (110 lbs.), and for
fissile material cylindrical packages weighing more than 100 kg (220
lbs.). PHMSA agrees with NRC's determination and expects that the
proposed change will provide cost savings to packaging manufacturers
without reducing safety.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 60 FR 50248 (Sep. 28, 1995).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Section 173.468
    Section 173.468 contains the requirements for the leaching test
required for LSA-III materials in Sec.  173.403. As stated in the
Section-by-Section discussion for Sec.  173.403, PHMSA proposes to
remove the leaching test requirement. Therefore, PHMSA proposes to
remove and reserve Sec.  173.468 in its entirety as it would no longer
be necessary.
Section 173.472
    Section 173.472 provides the requirements for exporting DOT
specification Type B packages. This section is no longer necessary
because the HM-250 final rule \20\ amended Sec. Sec.  173.416 and
173.417 to remove the paragraphs that authorized use of DOT
specification Type B and fissile material packages. Therefore, PHMSA
proposes

to remove and reserve this section in its entirety.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 79 FR 40589 (Jul. 11, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Section 173.475
    Section 173.475 contains the general quality control requirements
for packages authorized to contain Class 7 (radioactive) materials. In
this section, PHMSA proposes to add a new paragraph (j) that would
require offerors and shippers to assure that packages or overpacks have
been properly maintained while in storage before using those packages
to transport Class 7 (radioactive) materials. This new paragraph would
require that packages are maintained properly while in storage, thus
increasing safety by reducing the likelihood that a package would fail
while in transportation. PHMSA expects that there will be safety
benefits to packages that are properly maintained in storage. This
proposed change would align with the 2018 SSR-6, Rev. 1.

D. Part 174

Section 174.750
    Section 174.750 contains the requirements for rail incidents that
involve a hazardous materials leak. PHMSA proposes to revise paragraph
(a) to reference Sec.  173.443(e) when a leak of Class 7 (radioactive)
materials occurs. Section 173.443(e) specifies the steps that must be
taken when a leak of Class 7 (radioactive) materials occurs. These
steps include limiting access to the package or conveyance, determining
the resultant radiation level of the package or conveyance, and--if
applicable--additional steps for the protection of persons, property,
and the environment. This proposed change would provide clarification
and ensure that the contamination control requirements for Class 7
materials are more easily accessible to rail carriers.

E. Part 175

Section 175.705
    Section 175.705 contains the requirements for air carriers in the
event of radioactive contamination. PHMSA proposes to revise paragraph
(b) to reference Sec.  173.443(e) when a leak occurs of Class 7
(radioactive) materials. Section 173.443(e) specifies the steps that
must be taken when a leak of Class 7 (radioactive) materials occurs.
These steps include limiting access to the package or conveyance,
determining the resultant radiation level of the package or conveyance,
and--if applicable--additional steps for the protection of persons,
property, and the environment. This proposed change would provide
clarification and ensure that the contamination control requirements
for Class 7 materials are more easily accessible to air carriers.

F. Part 176

Section 176.715
    Section 176.715 contains the requirements for contamination control
aboard vessels. PHMSA proposes to revise Sec.  176.715 to reference
Sec.  173.443(e) when a leak occurs of Class 7 (radioactive) materials.
Section 173.443(e) specifies the steps that must be taken when a leak
of Class 7 materials occurs. These steps include limiting access to the
package or conveyance, determining the resultant radiation level of the
package or conveyance, and--if applicable--additional steps for the
protection of persons, property, and the environment. This proposed
change would provide clarification and ensure that the contamination
control requirements for Class 7 materials are more easily accessible
to vessel carriers.

G. Part 177

Section 177.843
    Section 177.843 contains requirements in the event of a motor
vehicle becoming contaminated. PHMSA proposes to revise paragraph (c)
to reference Sec.  173.443(e) when a leak occurs of Class 7
(radioactive) materials. Section 173.443 (e) specifies the steps that
must be taken when a leak of Class 7 materials occurs. These steps
include limiting access to the package or conveyance, determining the
resultant radiation level of the package or conveyance, and--if
applicable--additional steps for the protection of persons, property,
and the environment. This proposed change would provide clarification
and ensure that the contamination control requirements for Class 7
materials are more easily accessible to motor vehicle carriers.

VI. Regulatory Analyses and Notices

A. Statutory/Legal Authority

    This NPRM is published under the authority of Federal Hazardous
Materials Transportation Act (HMTA; 49 U.S.C. 5101-5127). Section
5103(b) of the HMTA authorizes the Secretary of Transportation to
prescribe regulations for the safe transportation of hazardous
materials in intrastate, interstate, and foreign commerce. The
Secretary's section 5103(b) authority includes the authority to
prescribe regulations to provide for security in such transportation.
Additionally, 49 U.S.C. 5120 authorizes the Secretary to consult with
interested international authorities to ensure that, to the extent
practicable, regulations governing the transportation of hazardous
materials in commerce are consistent with the standards adopted by
international authorities. The Secretary has delegated the authority
granted in the HMTA to the PHMSA Administrator pursuant to 49 CFR
1.97(b).

B. Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures

    Executive Order 12866 (``Regulatory Planning and Review'') \21\
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.'' Similarly, DOT Order 2100.6A
(``Policies and Procedures for Rulemakings'') requires that PHMSA
rulemaking actions include ``an assessment of the potential benefits,
costs, and other important impacts of the regulatory action,'' and (to
the extent practicable) the benefits, costs, and any significant
distributional impacts, including any environmental impacts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 58 FR 51735 (Oct. 4, 1993).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Executive Order 12866 and DOT Order 2100.6A require that PHMSA
submit ``significant regulatory actions'' to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) for review. This rulemaking is not considered a
significant regulatory action under section 3(f) of Executive Order
12866 and, therefore, was not formally reviewed by OMB. This rulemaking
is also not considered a significant rule under DOT Order 2100.6A.
    The following is a brief summary of costs, savings, and net
benefits of some of the amendments proposed in this notice. PHMSA has
developed a more detailed analysis of these costs and benefits in the
preliminary regulatory impact analysis (PRIA), a copy of which has been
placed in the docket.\22\ PHMSA seeks public comment on its proposed
revisions to the HMR and the preliminary cost and benefit analyses in
the PRIA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ The PRIA is available in the regulatory docket (Docket ID:
PHMSA-2018-0081) at www.regulations.gov.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    PHMSA proposes to amend the HMR to maintain alignment with
international regulations and standards and to make regulatory
amendments identified through internal regulatory review processes to
update, clarify, correct, or streamline certain regulatory requirements
applicable to the transportation of Class 7 (radioactive) materials.
These amendments would maintain the continued high level of

safety in the transportation of hazardous materials while producing a
net cost savings.
    PHMSA quantifies $57,000 \23\ in net cost savings over a 10-year
period from the incorporation of approximately 50 \24\ existing special
permits through the proposed amendments to add SCO-III material and to
allow stakeholders to request an approval to allow certain instruments
or articles to have an alternative activity limit for what is
considered an exempt material. Under the proposal, these special
permits would no longer be needed for shippers and transporters of
radioactive materials to comply with the HMR, eliminating the burden of
renewal. The following estimates do not include the non-monetized and
qualitative cost/cost savings discussed in the PRIA. The following
Table 6.1 from the PRIA presents a summary of monetized impacts that
contribute to PHMSA's estimation of quantified net cost savings.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ The total cost savings is calculated using 2016 dollars.
    \24\ This number is based on an estimation by subject matter
experts from the Office of Hazardous Materials Safety.

                                 Table 6.1--Proposed Special Permit Cost Savings
                 [Total cost savings in 2021 dollars over 10 years at 3% and 7% discount rates]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Discounted      Discounted
                              Year                                 Undiscounted     cost saving    cost savings
                                                                   cost savings        (3%)            (7%)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2023............................................................        $6,886.1        $6,490.8        $6,014.6
2024............................................................         6,886.1         6,301.7         5,621.1
2025............................................................         6,886.1         6,118.2         5,253.3
2026............................................................         6,886.1         5,940.0        4,4909.7
2027............................................................         6,886.1         5,767.0         4,588.5
2028............................................................         6,886.1         5,599.0         4,288.3
2029............................................................         6,886.1         5,435.9         4,007.8
2030............................................................         6,886.1         5,277.6         3,745.6
2031............................................................         6,886.1         5,123.9         3,500.5
2032............................................................         6,886.1         4,974.6         3,271.5
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................................        68,860.7        57,028.7        45,200.8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annualized......................................................  ..............         6,685.5         6,435.6
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    PHMSA describes additional provisions in the PRIA for which PHMSA
was unable to monetize their cost savings impacts, but instead provides
a qualitative discussion. Additional potential benefits identified in
this NPRM include enhanced safety resulting from the consistency of
domestic and international requirements for transportation of
radioactive materials and streamlining regulatory compliance for
shippers engaged in domestic and international commerce, including
trans-border shipments within North America. In addition, the proposed
changes should permit continued access to foreign markets by domestic
shippers of radiopharmaceuticals and other radioactive materials. While
information gaps prevent quantification of cost savings for these
items, PHMSA believes that they streamline unnecessary requirements or
provide additional flexibility, while maintaining the same high level
of safety in the transportation of hazardous materials.
    As noted in Table 6.1, PHMSA estimates annualized net cost savings
of approximately $6,700 at a 3% discount rate. Please see the PRIA in
the regulatory docket for additional detail and a description of
PHMSA's methods and calculations. PHMSA encourages interested parties
to provide information and quantitative data relevant to the proposals
in this notice and the associated costs and benefits described in the
preliminary regulatory evaluation for this rulemaking.

C. Executive Order 13132

    PHMSA analyzed this rulemaking in accordance with the principles
and criteria contained in Executive Order 13132 (``Federalism'') \25\
and its implementing Presidential Memorandum (``Preemption'').\26\
Executive Order 13132 requires agencies to assure meaningful and timely
input by state and local officials in the development of regulatory
policies that may have ``substantial direct effects on the States, on
the relationship between the national government and the States, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels
of government.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ 64 FR 43255 (Aug. 4, 1999).
    \26\ 74 FR 24693 (May 22, 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule would not have 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 Federal hazardous materials
transportation law contains an express preemption provision at 49
U.S.C. 5125(a) that preempts State, local, and Tribal requirements if:
(1) compliance with such requirement makes compliance with the DOT
regulations issued under the authority of the Federal hazardous
materials transportation law not possible; or (2) compliance with such
requirement is an obstacle to carrying out a regulation prescribed
under the authority of the Federal hazardous materials transportation
law. The Federal hazardous materials transportation law also contains
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:
    (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;
    (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 proposed rule addresses covered subject items (1), (2), (3),
and (5) and would preempt any State, local, and Tribal requirements not
meeting the ``substantively the same'' standard. Any preemption results
directly from operation of 49 U.S.C. 5125. In addition, in this
instance, the preemptive effect of the proposed rule is limited to the
minimum level necessary to achieve the objectives of the hazardous
materials transportation law under which the final rule is promulgated.
Therefore, the consultation and funding requirements of Executive Order
13132 do not apply.

D. Executive Order 13175

    PHMSA analyzed this rulemaking in accordance with the principles
and criteria contained in Executive Order 13175 (``Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments'') \27\ and DOT Order
5301.1 (``Department of Transportation Policies, Programs, and
Procedures Affecting American Indians, Alaska Natives, and
Tribes'').\28\ Executive Order 13175 and DOT Order 5301.1 require DOT
Operating Administrations to assure meaningful and timely input from
Native American Tribal government representatives in the development of
rules that significantly or uniquely affect Tribal communities by
imposing ``substantial direct compliance costs'' or ``substantial
direct effects'' on such communities or the relationship and
distribution of power between the federal government and Native
American Tribes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ 65 FR 67249 (Nov. 9, 2000).
    \28\ Available at DOT Order 5301.1 American Indians/Alaska
Natives/Tribes [bond] US Department of Transportation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    PHMSA assessed the impact of the rulemaking and determined that it
would not significantly or uniquely affect Tribal communities or Native
American Tribal governments. The changes to the HMR proposed in this
NPRM would have broad, national scope. PHMSA does not expect this
rulemaking would significantly or uniquely affect Tribal communities,
impose substantial compliance costs on Native American Tribal
governments, or mandate Tribal action. And because PHMSA expects the
rulemaking would not adversely affect the safe transportation of
hazardous materials generally, PHMSA does not expect it would entail
disproportionately high adverse risks for Tribal communities. For these
reasons, the funding and consultation requirements of Executive Order
13175 and DOT Order 5301.1 to apply. However, PHMSA solicits comment
from Native American Tribal governments and communities on potential
impacts of the proposed rulemaking.

E. Regulatory Flexibility Act and Executive Order 13272

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires
agencies to review proposed regulations to assess their impact on small
entities, unless the agency head certifies that a proposed rulemaking
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities including small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations under 50,000.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act directs agencies to consider exceptions
and differing compliance standards for small businesses, where possible
to do so and still meet the objectives of applicable regulatory
statutes. Executive Order 13272 (``Proper Consideration of Small
Entities in Agency Rulemaking'') \29\ requires agencies to establish
procedures and policies to promote compliance with the Regulatory
Flexibility Act and to ``thoroughly review draft rules to assess and
take appropriate account of the potential impact'' of the rules on
small businesses, governmental jurisdictions, and small organizations.
The DOT posts its implementing guidance on a dedicated web page.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ 67 FR 53461 (Aug. 16, 2002).
    \30\ DOT, ``Rulemaking Requirements Related to Small Entities,''
https://www.transportation.gov/regulations/rulemaking-requirements-concerning-small-entities (last accessed June 17, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This proposed rulemaking has been developed in accordance with
Executive Order 13272 and with DOT's procedures and policies to promote
compliance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act to ensure that potential
impacts of draft rules on small entities are properly considered. This
proposed rule facilitates the transportation of hazardous materials in
international commerce by providing consistency with international
standards. It applies to offerors and carriers of hazardous materials,
some of whom are small entities, such as suppliers, packaging
manufacturers, distributors, and training companies. As discussed in
the PRIA, the amendments in this proposed rule would result in net cost
savings and streamline regulatory compliance for shippers engaged in
domestic and international commerce, including transborder shipments
within North America. PHMSA has identified six provisions proposed in
the NPRM that may incur costs however as explained in the PRIA it does
not believe these costs will be significant. Additionally, the
proposals in this notice would allow U.S. companies, including small
entities competing in foreign markets, to comply, to the maximum extent
possible, with a single system of regulations. The proposals would also
maintain the high level of safety in the transport of hazardous
materials. Therefore, PHMSA tentatively certifies that these amendments
will not, if adopted, have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. However, PHMSA solicits comments
on the anticipated economic impacts to small entities and which
entities will be affected.

F. Paperwork Reduction Act

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.),
no person is required to respond to an information collection unless it
has been approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and
displays a valid OMB control number. Pursuant to 44 U.S.C.
3506(c)(2)(B) and 5 CFR 1320.8(d), PHMSA must provide interested
members of the public and affected agencies with an opportunity to
comment on information collection and recordkeeping requests.
    PHMSA has analyzed this NPRM in accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act. PHMSA currently accounts for shipping paper burdens
under OMB Control Number 2137-0034, ``Hazardous Materials Shipping
Papers and Emergency Response Information.'' PHMSA proposes two
amendments in this NPRM that may impact burden accounted for in OMB
Control Number 2137-0034. The first is the proposed revision to Sec.
172.203(d) to allow a shipper to list the label type and transport
index of an overpack on the shipping paper, instead of for the
individual packages contained in the overpack. The second is the
proposed requirement for a shipper to list the nuclide names for
fissile Class 7 (radioactive) material on the shipping paper even if it
is not required for the package in accordance with Sec.  172.203. PHMSA
expects the proposed change regarding an overpack's transport index
will result in an overall reduction in burden while the nuclides
proposed change will result in a small increase in burden. PHMSA
analyzed these proposals and expects the impact to the

overall annual burden will be negligible in relation to the total
number of burden hours currently associated with this information
collection because PHMSA anticipates that the proposed change which
will increase burden will affect less than 10 shipments per year. PHMSA
seeks comment on any expected cost of the proposed change requiring a
shipper to list nuclide names.
    PHMSA accounts for burden associated with Class 7 (radioactive)
materials reporting and recordkeeping requirements under OMB Control
Number 2137-0510 ``RAM Transportation Requirements.'' PHMSA proposes to
revise Sec.  173.448 to require that overpacks be marked with the
consigner and consignee name and address when the mark is not visible.
PHMSA expects that this proposed revision will increase burden under
OMB Control Number 2137-0510. PHMSA estimates that there are 10
respondents offering radioactive materials in overpacks. Each of these
respondents will be required to mark the consigner and consignee name
and address on 50 overpacks per year, for a total of 500 annual
responses (10 respondents x 50 overpacks per respondent). PHMSA
estimates that it will take one (1) minute to mark each overpack with
the consigner and consignee name and address, resulting in an increase
of approximately eight (8) annual burden hours. The following
summarizes the estimated increase in burden associated with OMB Control
Number 2137-0510:
    Annual Increase in Number of Respondents: 10.
    Annual Increase in Number of Responses: 500.
    Annual Increase in Burden Hours: Eight (8).
    PHMSA requests comments on the information collection and
recordkeeping burdens associated with developing, implementing, and
maintaining these proposed requirements. Address written comments to
the DOT Docket Operations Office identified in the ADDRESSES section of
this rulemaking. PHMSA must receive comments regarding information
collection burdens prior to the close of the comment period identified
in the DATES section of this rulemaking. Requests for a copy of this
information collection should be directed to Steven Andrews,
[email protected], Standards and Rulemaking Division (PHH-10), Pipeline
and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue
SE, Washington, DC 20590-0001. If these proposed amendments are adopted
in a final rule, PHMSA will submit the revised information collection
and recordkeeping requirements to OMB for approval.

G. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA; 2 U.S.C. 1501 et
seq.) requires agencies to assess the effects of federal regulatory
actions on state, local, and Tribal governments, and the private
sector. For any NPRM or final rule that includes a federal mandate that
may result in the expenditure by state, local, and Tribal governments,
or by the private sector of $100 million or more in 1996 dollars in any
given year, the agency must prepare, amongst other things, a written
statement that qualitatively and quantitatively assesses the costs and
benefits of the federal mandate.
    As explained in the PRIA, available for review in the docket, this
proposed rulemaking does not impose unfunded mandates under the UMRA.
It does not result in costs of $100 million or more in 1996 dollars to
either state, local, or Tribal governments, or to the private sector,
in any one year. Therefore, the analytical requirements of UMRA do not
apply.

H. Environmental Assessment

    The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321
et seq.), requires that federal agencies analyze proposed actions to
determine whether the action would have a significant impact on the
human environment. The Council on Environmental Quality implementing
regulations (40 CFR parts 1500-1508) require Federal agencies to
conduct an environmental review considering (1) the need for the
action, (2) alternatives to the action, (3) probable environmental
impacts of the action and alternatives, and (4) the agencies and
persons consulted during the consideration process. DOT Order 5610.1C
(``Procedures for Considering Environmental Impacts'') establishes
departmental procedures for evaluation of environmental impacts under
NEPA and its implementing regulations.
1. Purpose and Need
    This NPRM would amend the HMR to maintain alignment with
international consensus standards by incorporating into the HMR various
amendments from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
publication, entitled ``Regulations for the Safe Transport of
Radioactive Material, 2018 Edition, Specific Safety Requirements, No.
SSR-6 (Rev. 1).'' PHMSA proposes additional amendments that are
intended to update, clarify, correct, or streamline certain regulatory
requirements. PHMSA notes that the amendments proposed in this NPRM are
intended to result in cost savings and reduced regulatory burden for
shippers engaged in domestic and international commerce, including
transborder shipments within North America. Absent adoption of the
amendments proposed in the NPRM, U.S. companies--including numerous
small entities competing in foreign markets--may be at an economic
disadvantage because of their need to comply with a dual system of
regulations.
    As explained at greater length above in the preamble of this NPRM
and in the PRIA (each of which are incorporated by reference in this
discussion of the environmental impacts of the Proposed Action
Alternative), PHMSA expects the adoption of the regulatory amendments
proposed in this NPRM would maintain the high safety standard currently
achieved under the HMR. PHMSA has evaluated the safety each of the
amendments proposed in this NPRM on its own merit, as well as the
aggregate impact on transportation safety from adoption of those
amendments.
2. Alternatives
    In developing this proposed rule, PHMSA considered the following
alternatives:
No Action Alternative
    If PHMSA were to select the No Action Alternative, current
regulations would remain in place and no provisions would be amended or
added.
Proposed Action Alternative
    This alternative is the current proposal as it appears in this
NPRM, applying to transport of hazardous materials by various transport
modes (highway, rail, vessel, and aircraft). The proposed amendments
included in this alternative are more fully discussed in the preamble
and regulatory text sections of this NPRM. This proposed action amends
certain requirements related to the shipment of Class 7 (radioactive)
materials including various provisions that will increase safety
standards and improve enforceability such as:
     Sec.  173.410--PHMSA is proposing a new paragraph which
will require each packages used for the shipment of Class 7
(radioactive) materials to be designed so that the effect of aging
mechanisms (e.g., corrosion, abrasion, fatigue, crack propagation,
changes of material compositions or mechanical properties due to
thermal loadings or radiation,

generation of decomposition gas, etc.) and their impact on the
functions important to safety is considered.
     Sec.  173.453(d)--PHMSA is proposing to add an additional
requirement to this exception requiring fissile material to be
distributed homogeneously and to not form a lattice arrangement within
the package.
    Furthermore, this NPRM proposes to amend the following provisions,
which PHMSA will explain in greater detail the following section
analyzing environmental impacts.
     Sec.  173.403--PHMSA is proposing to remove the
requirement for compliance with Sec.  173.468, which requires the
material to be insoluble or be intrinsically contained in a way that
prevents leaching when placed in water.
     Sec.  173.427--PHMSA is proposing to add a new category of
materials, SCO-III that were previously authorized for transport by
special permit.
     Sec. Sec.  173.435 and 173.436--PHMSA is proposing to add
various radionuclides to the ``Table of A1 and A2
values for radionuclides'' and the ``Exempt material activity
concentrations and exempt consignment activity limits for
radionuclides.''
     Sec.  173.453--PHMSA is proposing to add two entries,
``uranium with enrichment up to five percent'' and ``fissile material
with no more than 140 grams fissile nuclides'' to the list of fissile
materials excepted from the requirements of subpart I, Class 7
(Radioactive Materials).
     Sec.  173.465--PHMSA is proposing to exempt certain
packages ``not exceeding'' 50 kg (110 lbs.) and 100 kg (220 lbs.) from
the requirement to perform a free drop test.
3. Analysis of Environmental Impacts
No Action Alternative
    If PHMSA were to select the No Action Alternative the HMR would
remain unchanged, and no provisions would be amended or added. Any
economic benefits gained through harmonization of the HMR with updated
international consensus standards governing shipping of hazardous
materials would not be realized. Under this alternative, PHMSA would
not exempt certain materials from regulatory requirements including
certain package tests, storage requirements, and compliance with
subpart I for certain specified fissile materials that PHMSA believes
are not needed for safety.
    Additionally, the No Action Alternative would not adopt enhanced
and clarified regulatory requirements expected to maintain the high
level of safety in transportation of hazardous materials provided by
the HMR. As explained in the preamble to the NPRM, consistency between
the HMR and current international standards can enhance safety by (1)
ensuring that the HMR is informed by the latest best practices and
lessons learned; (2) improving understanding of and compliance with
pertinent requirements; (3) enabling consistent emergency response
procedures in the event of a hazardous materials incident; and (4)
facilitating the smooth flow of hazardous materials from their points
of origin to their points of destination, thereby avoiding risks to the
public and the environment from release of hazardous materials from
delays or interruptions in the transportation of those materials. PHMSA
would not capture those benefits if it declines to incorporate updated
international standards into the HMR under the No Action Alternative.
    PHMSA expects that the No Action Alternative could have a modest
impact on GHG emissions. Because PHMSA expects the differences between
the HMR and international standards for transportation of hazardous
materials could result in transportation delays or interruptions, PHMSA
anticipates that there could be modestly higher GHG emissions from some
combination of (1) transfer of delayed hazardous materials to and from
interim storage, (2) return of improperly shipped materials to their
point of origin, and (3) reshipment of returned materials. PHMSA notes
that it is unable to quantify such GHG emissions because of the
difficulty in identifying the precise quantity or characteristics of
such interim storage or returns/reshipments. PHMSA also submits that,
to the extent that there are any delays arising from inconsistencies
between the HMR and recently updated international standards, there
could also be adverse impacts from the No Action Alternative for
minority populations, low-income populations, or other underserved and
other disadvantaged communities.
Proposed Action Alternative
    As described above, PHMSA is proposing the following changes to the
HMR in this NPRM. While the following provisions are intended to reduce
economic and logistical burdens, PHMSA also believes that these changes
are justified by various studies and will not have a significant impact
on safety.
     Sec.  173.403--PHMSA is proposing to remove the
requirement for compliance with Sec.  173.468, which requires the
material to be insoluble or be intrinsically contained in a way that
prevents leaching when placed in water. A paper submitted to IAEA which
prompted this change showed that an inhalation dose under mechanical
accident conditions of transport significantly depends on the physical
form of the LSA material. The essential difference between LSA-II and
LSA-III materials is that LSA-III is limited to solid material
excluding powder. The results of the investigation conducted by the
German authority who submitted the paper have shown that the amount of
airborne material released following mechanical accident conditions of
transport that could be inhaled is lower by at least a factor of 100
for LSA-III solids than for LSA-II solids in powder form. This much
lower airborne release for LSA-III material due to its non-readily
dispersible form compensates more than enough for its allowable 20-fold
increase in average specific activity compared to LSA-II solid in
powder form. Therefore, there is no need to take any credit from a
leaching test to justify this allowable 20-fold increase in average
specific activity between LSA-III and LSA-II, and the removal of this
test will not lead to any decreases in safety or increases in radiation
release or exposure.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ B[uuml]ttner, Uwe, Frank Nitsche, Ingo Reiche, Bruno
Desnoyers, and Florentint Lange. Working paper. Review of LSA-II/
LSA-III Concept--Deletion of the LSA-III Leaching Test. Cologne,
Germany, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     173.427--PHMSA is proposing to add a new category of
materials, SCO-III that were previously authorized for transport by
special permit. The proposed language requires that offerors of this
material must provide an equivalent level of safety at least equivalent
to that which would be provided if the SCO-III had been subjected to
the test required in Sec.  173.465(b), followed by the test required in
Sec.  173.465(e). The transport plan must also demonstrate that there
would be no loss or dispersal of the radioactive contents and no more
than a 20% increase in the maximum dose rate at any external surface of
the object. The information confirming the equivalent level of safety
must be compiled into a transport plan along with other info and be
submitted to PHMSA for approval before every shipment of SCO-III. PHMSA
can then determine if the shipment is safe enough to go forward. These
measures will ensure that any SCO-III shipments do not impose undue
risk to the public in transportation.
     Sec. Sec.  173.435 and 173.436--Adds various radionuclides
to the ``Table of A1 and A2 values for
radionuclides'' and the ``Exempt material activity

concentrations and exempt consignment activity limits for
radionuclides'' Table. This change allows for 7 new radionuclides to
utilize their new unique A1 and A2 values instead
of the generic values of tables 7 and 8 allowing for greater ease of
shipment and removing the possible need for decay prior to shipment,
the use of multiple Type A Packages, or the use of Type B packages, as
well as leading to possible miscommunication of the relative hazards.
While any increase in transportation of radioactive materials
inherently increases the risk of release and exposure to radiation, the
proposed limits in the tables of Sec. Sec.  173.435 and 173.436
combined with the established HMR framework for transporting Class 7
(radioactive) maintain the existing level of safety and chance of
exposure due to accidental release.
     Sec.  173.453 Fissile materials--exceptions. PHMSA is
proposing to add two entries, ``uranium with enrichment up to 5
percent'' and ``fissile material with no more than 140 grams fissile
nuclides'' to the list of fissile materials excepted from the
requirements of subpart I for fissile materials, including the
requirements of Sec. Sec.  173.457 and 173.459, but are subject to all
other requirements of this subpart.
    Fissile materials present two potential risks. The first is
radiation like any other Class 7, radioactive material. The second is
the risk of the material going critical, which is unique to fissile
materials. The fissile exempt materials of Sec.  173.453 are not given
an exemption from all of subpart I, just the fissile material
requirements. Typically, these materials must be placed in a type A
package. However, quantity specified in (g) is so small that NRC does
not see any issues with radiation provided it is packaged as required.
As for criticality, as stated in the preamble, the additional neutron
absorption provided by uranium-238 in 5.0 weight percent enriched
uranium compensates for the additional 1.5 grams of uranium-235 mass
(i.e., up to 3.5 grams uranium-235 per package), when compared to the
49 CFR 173.453(a) limit of 2.0 grams.
    As for paragraph (h), ``fissile material with no more than 140
grams fissile nuclides,'' this mass value, higher than that contained
in IAEA SSR-6 (Rev. 1) paragraph 417(e) is justified, given the
conservatism inherent in the exclusive use restriction of the SSR-6
(Rev. 1) provision and because plutonium-239 would have to be shipped
in a Type B package that could withstand hypothetical accident
conditions. Therefore, PHMSA and NRC propose a limit of 140 grams of
fissile material. When determining the proposed limit, NRC considered
uranium-235 rather than plutonium-239, as any amount of plutonium-239
over 0.435 grams is considered Type B, which would have to be packaged
to withstand both normal and hypothetical accident conditions of
transport. This limit is based on one fifth of a consensus minimum
critical mass of uranium-235 under optimum conditions. This mass
represents a conservative limit for fissile material, because five
times this amount would remain subcritical under any conditions.
    Because plutonium would not qualify for this exception, the NRC
used uranium as the basis for their calculations. The packaging and
exclusive use requirements make up for the exception, and there is no
risk of criticality, as it would take about five times more material
for that to be a concern. For these reasons, based on the expertise of
NRC and PHMSA, these changes will not cause an undue increase in risk
of exposure.
     Sec.  173.465 Type A packaging tests--This proposed change
exempts certain packages ``not exceeding'' 50 kg (110 lbs.) for
rectangular packages and 100 kg (220 lbs.) for cylindrical packages
from the requirement to perform one of two free drop tests. This
limitation on the corner drop test already exists in the HMR for Type-A
packagings to contain non-fissile materials and for all packagings
subject to the ``normal conditions of transport'' tests in NRC's
regulations in 10 CFR 71.71. PHMSA and NRC believe that it would be
very unlikely for packages meeting those weight thresholds to undergo
sustained corner or rim drops due to the weight of the package and how
heavy packages are physically handled in the supply chain. Type A
packagings below the given weight thresholds are still required to be
capable of withstanding a drop from 1.2 meters (four feet) in a manner
so as to suffer maximum damage to the safety features being tested.
    As explained further in the discussion of the No Action
Alternative, the preamble, and the PRIA, PHMSA anticipates the changes
proposed under the Proposed Action Alternative will maintain the high
safety standards currently achieved under the HMR. Harmonization of the
HMR with updated international consensus standards is also expected to
capture economic efficiencies gained from avoiding shipping delays and
compliance costs associated with having to comply with divergent U.S.
and international regulatory regimes for transportation of hazardous
materials.
    PHMSA expects that the Proposed Action Alternative could realize
modest reductions in GHG emissions. Because PHMSA expects the
differences between the HMR and international standards for
transportation of hazardous materials could result in delays or
interruptions, PHMSA anticipates that the No Action Alternative could
result in modestly higher GHG emissions from some combination of (1)
transfer of delayed hazardous materials to and from interim storage,
(2) return of improperly shipped materials to their point of origin, or
(3) reshipment of returned materials. The Proposed Action Alternative
avoids those risks resulting from divergence of the HMR from updated
international standards. PHMSA notes, however, that it is unable to
quantify any GHG emissions benefits because of the difficulty in
identifying the precise quantity or characteristics of such interim
storage or returns/re-shipments. PHMSA also submits that the Proposed
Action Alternative would avoid any delayed or interrupted shipments
arising from the divergence of the HMR from updated international
standards under the No Action Alternative that could result in adverse
impacts for minority populations, low-income populations, or other
underserved and other disadvantaged communities.
4. Agency Consultation
    PHMSA has coordinated with NRC in the development of this proposed
rule. PHMSA will consider the views expressed in response to this
Notice submitted by members of the public, state and local governments,
industry, and any other interested stakeholders.
5. Proposed Finding of No Significant Impact
    PHMSA expects the adoption of the Proposed Action Alternative's
regulatory amendments will maintain the HMR's current high level of
safety for shipments of hazardous materials transported by highway,
rail, aircraft, and vessel, and as such finds the HMR amendments in the
NPRM would have no significant impact on the human environment. PHMSA
expects that the Proposed Action Alternative will avoid adverse safety,
environmental justice, and GHG emissions impacts of the No Action
Alternative. Furthermore, based on PHMSA's analysis of these provisions
described above, PHMSA tentatively finds that codification and
implementation of this rule would not result in a significant impact to
the human environment.
    PHMSA welcomes any views, data, or information related to
environmental

impacts that may result from NPRM's proposed requirements, the No
Action Alternative, and other viable alternatives and their
environmental impacts.

I. Privacy Act

    In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the
public to better inform any amendments to the HMR considered in this
rulemaking. DOT posts these comments, without edit, including any
personal information the commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as
described in the system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS). DOT's
complete Privacy Act Statement is in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000,\32\ or on DOT's website at http://www.dot.gov/privacy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ 65 FR 19477 (Apr. 11, 2000).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Executive Order 13609 and International Trade Analysis

    Executive Order 13609 (``Promoting International Regulatory
Cooperation'') \33\ requires that agencies consider whether the impacts
associated with significant variations between domestic and
international regulatory approaches are unnecessary or may impair the
ability of American business to export and compete internationally. In
meeting shared challenges involving health, safety, labor, security,
environmental, and other issues, international regulatory cooperation
can identify approaches that are at least as protective as those that
are or would be adopted in the absence of such cooperation.
International regulatory cooperation can also reduce, eliminate, or
prevent unnecessary differences in regulatory requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ 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) (as
amended, the Trade Agreements Act), prohibits agencies from
establishing any standards or engaging in related activities that
create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United
States. Pursuant to the Trade Agreements Act, the establishment of
standards is not considered an unnecessary obstacle to the foreign
commerce of the United States, so long as the standards have a
legitimate domestic objective, such as providing for safety, and do not
operate to exclude imports that meet this objective. The statute also
requires consideration of international standards and, where
appropriate, that they be the basis for U.S. standards.
    PHMSA participates in the establishment of international standards
to protect the safety of the American public, and it has assessed the
effects of the proposed rule to ensure that it does not cause
unnecessary obstacles to foreign trade. In fact, the proposed rule is
expected to facilitate international trade by harmonizing U.S. and
international requirements for the transportation of hazardous
materials. The rule is expected to reduce regulatory burdens and
minimize delays arising from having to comply with divergent regulatory
requirements. Accordingly, this rulemaking is consistent with Executive
Order 13609 and PHMSA's obligations under the Trade Agreements Act.

K. Executive Order 12898 and Environmental Justice

    Executive Orders 12898 (``Federal Actions to Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations''),\34\
13985 (``Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved
Communities Through the Federal Government''),\35\ 13990 (``Protecting
Public Health and the Environment and Restoring Science to Tackle the
Climate Crisis''),\36\ 14008 (``Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and
Abroad''),\37\ and DOT Order 5610.2C (``Department of Transportation
Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations'') require DOT agencies to achieve environmental
justice as part of their mission by identifying and addressing, as
appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human health or
environmental effects, including interrelated social and economic
effects, of their programs, policies, and activities on minority
populations, low-income populations, and other underserved and
disadvantaged communities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ 59 FR 7629 (Feb. 16, 1994).
    \35\ 86 FR 7009 (Jan. 25, 2021).
    \36\ 86 FR 7037 (Jan. 25, 2021).
    \37\ 86 FR 7619 (Feb. 1, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    PHMSA has evaluated this proposed rule under the above Executive
Orders and DOT Order 5610.2C and expects it would not cause
disproportionately high and adverse human health and environmental
effects on minority, low-income, underserved, and other disadvantaged
populations, and communities. The proposed action may even reduce GHG
emissions by reducing delays in transportation arising from having to
comply with divergent regulatory requirements. The rulemaking is