[Federal Register: July 23, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 142)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 42765-42769]
[DOCID:fr23jy08-21]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

49 CFR Parts 171, 172, and 173

[Docket No. PHMSA-2008-0182]

Petitions for Interim Standards for Rail Tank Cars Used to
Transport Toxic-by-Inhalation Hazard Materials

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

ACTION: Notice of petitions for rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: This document solicits comments on the merits of two petitions
for rulemaking filed with PHMSA seeking promulgation of an interim
standard for railroad tank cars used to transport toxic by inhalation
hazard (TIH) materials. One petition was filed jointly by the American
Chemistry Council, American Short Line and Regional Railroad
Association, Association of American Railroads, Chlorine Institute, and
Railway Supply Institute, and a second petition was filed by The
Fertilizer Institute.

DATES: Comments must be received by August 22, 2008.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by the docket number
PHMSA-08-0182 by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
     Mail: Docket Operations, U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building, Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Routing
Symbol M-30, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: To Docket Operations, Room W12-140 on the
ground floor of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal Holidays.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the agency name and
docket number for this notice at the beginning of the comment. Note
that all comments received will be posted without change to the docket
management system, including any personal information provided.
    Docket: For access to the dockets to read background documents or
comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov or DOT's Docket
Operations Office (see ADDRESSES).
    Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search the electronic form of any
written communications and comments received into any of our dockets by
the name of the individual submitting the document (or signing the
document, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor
union, etc.). You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in
the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 70;
Pages 19477-78).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William Schoonover,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
Office of Safety Assurance and Compliance, Federal Railroad
Administration; Lucinda Henriksen,<PHONE_NUMBER>, Office of Chief
Counsel,

Federal Railroad Administration; or Michael Stevens,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
Office of Hazardous Materials Standards, Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Background

    By notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) published April 1, 2008,
under Docket No. FRA-2006-25169 (HM-246) (73 FR 17818-65), the U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT) through the Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) and Federal Railroad
Administration (FRA), proposed regulations to improve the
crashworthiness protection of tank cars carrying toxic-by-inhalation
hazard (TIH) materials. In addition to certain operational
restrictions, the NPRM proposed enhanced TIH tank car performance
standards for head and shell impacts.
    In petitions dated July 3, 2008 and July 7, 2008, the American
Chemistry Council, American Short Line and Regional Railroad
Association, Association of American Railroads, Chlorine Institute, and
Railway Supply Institute (collectively, the Petitioner Group) and The
Fertilizer Institute (TFI), respectively, have requested that the
Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR parts 171-180) be amended
to authorize interim standards for tank cars transporting TIIH
materials. Both petitions suggest that the interim standards would be
effective until such time as PHMSA and FRA adopt enhanced performance
standards for TIH tank cars. The Petitioner Group and TFI petitions
were received and acknowledged by PHMSA and assigned petition numbers
P-1525 and P-1524, respectively, under Docket No. PHMSA-2008-0182.
    This document is issued to obtain comments on the merits of the
petitions and to assist PHMSA in making a decision of whether to
proceed to issue a rule responding to the petitions under the ongoing
HM-246 tank car rulemaking. A complete copy of each petition is
available in the docket for this proceeding. For convenience, the text
of the petitions and accompanying tables are reprinted below.

B. Petition P-1525 Is Quoted As Follows:

    The American Chemistry Council (ACC), the American Short Line
and Regional Railroad Association (ASLRRA), the Association of
American Railroads (AAR), the Chlorine Institute (CI), and the
Railway Supply Institute (RSI) (Petitioners) submit this petition to
PHMSA to implement a new interim standard for tank cars used to
transport TIH materials. ACC is a trade association representing 130
member companies that account for approximately 85 percent of the
capacity for the production of basic industrial chemicals in the
United States. ASLRRA is an organization which represents over 450
member railroads in the class II and class III railroad industry.
AAR is a trade association whose membership includes freight
railroads that operate 72 percent of the line-haul mileage, employ
92 percent of the workers, and account for 95 percent of the freight
revenue of all railroads in the United States. CI is a 220 member,
not-for-profit trade association of chlor-alkali producers
worldwide, as well as packagers, distributors, users, and suppliers
accounting for more than 98 percent of the total chlorine production
capacity of the U.S., Canada, and Mexico. RSI is the international
trade association of suppliers to the nation's freight railroads and
rail passenger systems. The RSI Tank Car Committee members include
the major North American tank car builders and leasing companies,
who own and lease approximately 70% of the North American tank car
fleet.

I. Need For A New Interim Tank Car Standard

    On April 1, 2008, PHMSA published a notice of proposed
rulemaking containing a new tank car standard for TIH materials.\1\
Part of that proposal was that two years after issuance of a final
rule, newly constructed tank cars transporting TIH materials would
be required to comply with the new standard. Five years after
issuance of a final rule, only tank cars constructed of normalized
steel could be used to transport TIH materials. Eight years after
issuance of a final rule, all tank cars transporting TIH materials
would need to be in compliance with the new standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Docket No. FRA-2006-25169, 73 Fed. Reg. 17818.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed standard represents an innovative approach to tank
car design. The purpose of the proposed standard is to significantly
reduce the probability of release should a tank car be involved in
an accident. However, the tank car industry cannot meet the standard
today; the NPRM is truly technology-forcing.
    Petitioners strongly support PHMSA's initiative to create a new
tank car standard that would appreciably improve the safety of TIH
transportation. Petitioners are committed to doing their part to
minimize the occurrence of accidents and to reduce the possibility
of a release should an accident occur. PHMSA's effort to
dramatically reduce the probability of a release of TIH materials
through enhanced tank car standards is a goal shared by Petitioners.
    However, the publication of the NPRM has had two unintended
effects. One, publication has delayed the phasing out of aging tank
cars. Two, publication has threatened to cause a shortage of cars
needed for the transportation of TIH materials.
    Since under the NPRM tank cars not meeting the final standard
would have to be removed from TIH service within eight years of
issuance of the final rule, the NPRM has had the unintended
consequence of providing an incentive for shippers and lessors to
stop purchasing new tank cars for TIH transportation, pending the
issuance of the final rule. From the perspective of both shippers
who own tank cars used to transport their TIH materials and lessors
who lease tank cars used to transport TIH materials, investments in
new tank cars cannot be justified unless those cars will be used for
at least two decades. Note that under DOT regulations, tank cars
have a service life of fifty years.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 49 CFR 215.203.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Absent the NPRM, many older tank cars likely would be replaced
by tank cars exceeding minimum DOT specifications. Unfortunately,
because of the economic disincentive to purchase new tank cars for
TIH transportation, those tank cars are not being replaced.
    During the meetings on the NPRM held in May, shipper after
shipper stated that the NPRM threatened to cause a shortage of tank
cars for TIH transportation. The shippers stated that lessors are
reluctant to renew leases partly due to a concern that the NPRM's
call for a dramatically new tank car design will increase their
liability should a tank car meeting minimum PHMSA standards be
involved in an accident.

II. An Interim Standard Based On Probability Of Release

    Petitioners have a solution to these problems. Petitioners
propose that PHMSA promulgate an interim standard that provides for
the construction of tank cars that significantly reduce the
probability of release of product using existing technology and
grandfather those cars for twenty-five years following issuance of
the final rule. Such a standard is in the public interest for the
following reasons:
     By authorizing the use of tank cars that exceed PHMSA
minimum standards for a period of time exceeding the eight-year
phase-out period suggested in the NPRM, the disincentive to replace
minimum specification cars will be reduced.
     To the extent shippers and lessors replace older cars
with cars less likely to release TIH in the event of an accident,
safety will be significantly enhanced. Similarly, by reducing the
disincentive to replace older cars with cars less likely to release
TIH in the event of an accident, PHMSA's goal of replacing older
cars will be realized sooner.
     By limiting the grandfather period to twenty-five
years, instead of the normal fifty year useful life provided by DOT
regulations, PHMSA would prevent creating an incentive to replace
cars prematurely prior to the effective date of the final TIH
standard to avoid, perhaps, the greater costs involved in
constructing cars meeting the final standard.
     PHMSA will avoid the unintended consequence of creating
a shortage of cars for the transportation of TIH materials.
     An interim standard providing for a significant
reduction in the probability of release is consistent with PHMSA's
objective of promulgating a new tank car standard representing a
significant improvement over the existing minimum specifications. At
the

same time, such an interim standard would reduce the commercial and
liability concerns of lessors that are contributing to a reluctance
to enter into new leases for TIH tank cars.

III. The Research Underlying Conditional Probability of Release

    Petitioners' proposed interim standard is based on research
conducted by the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (UIUC)
and the RSI-AAR Railroad Tank Car Safety Research and Test Project
(Tank Car Project). UIUC set out to analyze the ``conditional
probability of release'' (CPR) of product should a tank car be
involved in an accident.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ While there have been questions raised as to the extent to
which safety is enhanced by top fittings modifications in the UIUC
report, there is not doubt that the proposed interim tank car would
reduce the CPR by a substantial amount and provide for improved
accident survivability.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    UIUC's work is based on a report assessing lading loss
probabilities published by the Tank Car Project.\4\ The lading loss
report is based on 6,752 cars damaged in accidents. Consequently we
can demonstrate with confidence through the CPR method a significant
safety improvement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Railroad Tank Car Safety Research and Test Project, ``Safety
Performance of Tank Cars in Accidents: Probabilities of Lading
Loss'' (RA-05-02 January 2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    UIUC calculated the CPR for tank cars used to transport chlorine
and anhydrous ammonia, the 105A500W and 112J340W tank cars,
respectively.\5\ UIUC then compared the CPR for the chlorine and
anhydrous ammonia cars with CPRs for enhanced cars. The enhanced
cars had thicker heads and shells and improved top fittings
protection. In the case of chlorine, the thicker heads and shells
were based on the 105J600W specification. For anhydrous ammonia, the
thicker heads and shells were based on the 112J500W specification.
Because the enhanced cars are existing DOT specification tank cars,
the tank car database again served as the basis for the CPR
calculation for the head and shell improvements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Saat and Barkan, ``Risk Analysis of Rail Transport of
Chlorine & Ammonia on U.S. Railroad Mainlines'' (Feb. 27, 2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The top fittings protection was based on a new top fittings
design. The design was intended to survive potential forces exerted
on the top fittings in a rollover accident. More specifically, the
top fittings were designed to survive a rollover with a 9 mph linear
velocity.

IV. Using CPR as the Basis for Improved Performance

    UIUC's research points the way to a performance improvement
which is PHMSA's ultimate objective in its rulemaking proceeding on
TIH tank car standards. In the case of both chlorine and anhydrous
ammonia, the CPR improvement as calculated by UIUC is significant.
For example, chlorine calculations show an improvement of 63
percent, a reduction from 5 to 2 percent. For anhydrous ammonia, the
improvement shown is 71 percent, a reduction from 8 to 2 percent.
    Consequently, Petitioners propose an interim tank car design
with the following features:
     A design standard achieving CPR improvement from the
head and shell through the use of higher DOT class tank cars than
currently required by DOT regulations (See the table attached hereto
as Exhibit 1);
     An alternative performance standard requiring CPR
improvement equivalent or better in the head and shell as compared
to the design standard; and
     A top fittings protection performance standard.
    The design standard would require that in lieu of 105*300W or
112*340W tank cars, a 105J500W or 112J500W car, respectively, would
be required, with a minimum head and shell thickness of \13/16\' and
a full height \1/2\'' thick or equivalent head shield. A minimum
head and shell thickness would be included to prevent a shipper from
using a peculiar tank car that, for example, contains shell
protection but does not contain sufficient head protection.
    Similarly, in lieu of a 105*500W car, a 105J600W car would be
required, with a minimum head and shell thickness of \15/16\' and a
full height \1/2\'' thick or equivalent head shield. For those
commodities currently shipped in 105J600W cars, the minimum
thickness would also apply, but no upgrading of the DOT class tank
car would be required since the 600-pound car is the highest DOT
class tank car.
    The top fittings protection standard would require a design that
could survive a rollover with a 9 mph linear velocity, the criterion
used in the UIUC study. Note that AAR's Tank Car Committee has
already approved two designs meeting this standard. In addition, AAR
understands the Chlorine Institute is developing its own top
fittings standard that will meet the 9 mph criterion and DOT
regulations. In order to achieve this performance, a stronger top
fittings protection system must be permitted in lieu of the bolted-
on protective housing now mandated in the regulations. Welded
attachment has proven to be an effective method and should be
allowed.
    For the alternative performance standard, Petitioners propose
that DOT use a formula requiring improvements to the head and shell
that are at least as good, from a CPR perspective, as the designs
standard. Petitioners propose the following formula:
    1-(CPR of tank car-CPR of minimum specification tank car) >=
tank improvement factor for the commodity.
    The tank improvement factor is a factor that achieves a CPR
improvement from the head and shell at least as good as the design
specifications. The table in Exhibit 1 shows the tank improvement
factors for TIH materials commonly transported by rail. As the table
indicates, the tank improvement factor for a specific commodity is
based on a particular head and shell thickness. The head and shell
thicknesses were derived from the formula in 49 CFR 179.100-6,
taking into account design criteria such as commodity density, gross
rail load, outage, and car length and diameter.
    Petitioners also suggest that DOT permit use of an alternative
methodology to demonstrate improvement equivalent to the tank
improvement factor calculation. Of course, use of such an
alternative would be subject to DOT approval.
    Finally, in the case of chlorine, ACC and CI have taken the
performance criteria one step further. ACC and CI worked with UIUC
to calculate an alternative design that would achieve the desired
CPR improvement, 45 percent for head and shell improvements, 63
percent including top fittings.
     The chlorine design has a 0.777 inch head, a 0.777 inch
shell, and a 0.375 inch jacket with head shield of 0.625 inch.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ UIUC's CPR calculations assume that an equivalent level of
safety performance can be obtained by thickening the head shield and
jacket to compensate for equivalent reductions in thickness in the
tank head and shell, respectively. Further technical review of the
head shield is currently taking place to determine the appropriate
thickness. This thickness will be between 0.625 inch and 0.859 inch.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     This specific alternative design utilizes jacket
material which is steel with minimum tensile strength of 70 ksi and
minimum elongation in 2 inches of 21%.
    The calculations show that the CPR target can be met in more
than one way. With this calculation having been made for chlorine,
Petitioners also propose that this alternative specification
specifically be included in the interim standard.

V. Proposed Regulatory Language

    [Petitioners propose specific amendments to 49 CFR parts 171, 172,
and 173. The proposed amendments would address definitions, entries in
the Hazardous Materials Table, and tank car authorizations for TIH
materials. The complete petition may be reviewed by accessing the
docket identified at the beginning of this document.]

                                                     Table I
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Tank           Conditional
            Commodity name                   DOT minimum  specification          improvement     probability of
                                                                                factor (TIF)         release
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acetone Cyanohydrin, Stabilized.......  105J500W............................              0.67            0.0855
Acrolein..............................  105J600W............................              0.80            0.0419

Allyl Alcohol.........................  105J500W............................              0.67            0.0855
Ammonia, Anhydrous....................  105J500W............................              0.69            0.0855
Bromine...............................  105J500W............................              0.68            0.1028
Chlorine..............................  105J600W............................              0.69            0.0509
Chloropicrin..........................  105J500W............................              0.56            0.0855
Chlorosulfonic Acid...................  105J500W............................              0.56            0.0855
Dimethyl Sulfate......................  105J500W............................              0.57            0.0855
Dinitrogen Tetroxide..................  105J500W............................              0.57            0.0855
Ethyl Chloroformate...................   105J500W...........................              0.57            0.0855
Ethylene Oxide........................  105J500W............................              0.67            0.0855
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene.............  105J500W............................              0.68            0.1028
Hydrogen Chloride, Refrig. Liquid.....   105J600W...........................  ................            0.0284
Hydrogen Cyanide, Stabilized..........  105J600W............................              0.80            0.0419
Hydrogen Fluoride, Anhydrous..........  105J500W............................              0.63            0.0809
Hydrogen Sulfide......................  105J600W............................  ................            0.0299
Methyl Bromide........................  105J500W............................              0.56            0.0855
Methyl Mercaptan......................  105J500W............................              0.67            0.0855
Nitrosyl Chloride.....................  105J500W............................              0.57            0.0855
Phosphorus Trichloride................  105J500W............................              0.57            0.0855
Sulfur Dioxide........................   105J500W...........................              0.57            0.0855
Sulfur Trioxide, Stabilized...........  105J500W............................              0.56            0.0855
Sulfuric Acid, Fuming.................  105J500W............................              0.51            0.0802
Titanium Tetrachloride................  105J500W............................              0.56            0.0855
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                                                Exhibit 1
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Baseline DOT tank (DOT min. or accepted DOT STD)                       DOT specification tank car used to calculate TIF
                                     -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------     Tank
           Commodity name                                                                 Head      Shell         Proposed DOT                                  Head        Shell    improvement
                                            Current DOT          Head shields types    thickness  thickness   specification meeting     Head shields type     thickness   thickness     factor
                                           specification                                 (in.)      (in.)              TIF                                      (in.)       (in.)       (TIF)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acetone Cyanohydrin, Stabilized.....  105S300W...............  Full-Height...........     0.5625     0.5625   105J500W.............  Full-Height...........     0.8951      0.8951         0.67
Acrolein............................  105J500W...............  No....................     0.8950     0.8950   105J600W.............  Full-Height...........     1.2429      1.2429         0.80
Allyl Alcohol.......................   105S300W..............   Full-Height..........     0.5625     0.5625   105J500W.............   Full-Height..........     0.8951      0.8951         0.67
Ammonia, Anhydrous..................   105J300W..............   Full-Height..........     0.5625     0.5625   105J500W.............   Full-Height..........     1.0300      0.89           0.69
Bromine.............................   105A300W..............   No...................     0.5625     0.5625   105J500W.............   Full-Height..........     0.8125      0.8125         0.68
Chlorine............................   105J500W..............   No...................     0.7870     0.7870   105J600W.............   Full-Height..........     1.1360      0.9810         0.69
Chloropicrin........................   105S300W..............   Full-Height..........     0.5625     0.5625   105J500W.............   Full-Height..........     0.8125      0.8125         0.56
Chlorosulfonic Acid.................   105S300W..............   Full-Height..........     0.5625     0.5625   105J500W.............   Full-Height..........     0.8125      0.8125         0.56
Dimethyl Sulfate....................   105S300W..............   Full-Height..........     0.5625     0.5625   105J500W.............   Full-Height..........     0.8179      0.8179         0.57
Dinitrogen Tetroxide................   105J300W..............   Full-Height..........     0.5625     0.5625   105J500W.............   Full-Height..........     0.8179      0.81798        0.57
Ethyl Chloroformate.................   105S300W..............   Full-Height..........     0.5625     0.5625   105J500W.............   Full-Height..........     0.8179      0.8179         0.57
Ethylene Oxide......................   105J300W..............   Full-Height..........     0.5625     0.5625   105J500W.............   Full-Height..........     0.8951      0.8951         0.67
Hexachlorocyclo-pentadiene..........   105S300W..............   No...................     0.5625     0.5625   105J500W.............   Full-Height..........     0.8125      0.8125         0.68
Hydrogen Chloride, Refrig. Liquid...   105J600W..............   Full-Height..........  .........  .........  105J600W..............  Full-Height...........  ..........  ..........  ...........
Hydrogen Cyanide, Stabilized........   105A500W..............  No....................     0.8950     0.8950   105J600W.............  Full-Height...........     1.2429      1.2429         0.80
Hydrogen Flouride, Anhydrous........  112A340W...............  No....................     0.7040     0.7040   105J500W.............  Full-Height...........     0.8951      0.8951         0.63
Hydrogen Sulfide....................  105J600W...............  No....................  .........  .........  105J600W..............  Full-Height...........  ..........  ..........  ...........
Methyl Bromide......................   105J300W..............  Full-Height...........     0.5625     0.5625   105J500W.............  Full-Height...........     0.8125      0.8125         0.56
Methyl Mercaptan....................  105J300W...............  Full-Height...........     0.5625     0.5625   105J500W.............  Full-Height...........     0.8951      0.8951         0.67
Nitrosyl Chloride...................   105J300W..............  Full-Height...........     0.5625     0.5625   105J500W.............  Full-Height...........     0.8179      0.8179         0.57
Phosphorus Trichloride..............   105S300W..............  Full-Height...........     0.5625     0.5625   105J500W.............  Full-Height...........     0.8179      0.8179         0.57
Sulfur Dioxide......................  105J300W...............  Full-Height...........     0.5625     0.5625   105J500W.............  Full-Height...........     0.8179      0.8179         0.57
Sulfur Trioxide, Stabilized.........   105S300W..............  Full-Height...........     0.5625     0.5625   105J500W.............  Full-Height...........     0.8125      0.8125         0.56
Sulfuric Acid, Fuming...............  105S300W...............  Full-Height...........     0.5980     0.5980   105J500W.............  Full-Height...........     0.8125      0.8125         0.51
Titanium Tetrachloride..............   105S300W..............  Full-Height...........     0.5625     0.5625   105J500W.............  Full-Height...........     0.8125      0.8125         0.56
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Petition P-1524 Is Quoted as Follows:

    The Fertilizer Institute (TFI) is the national trade association
representing fertilizer producers, importers, wholesalers and
retailers. TFI's mission is to promote and protect the fertilizer
industry. Fertilizer nutrients provide the ``food'' plants need to
grow, ensure there is an adequate supply of nutritious food and
animal feed, and a bountiful supply of fiber and biofuels to help
meet the nation's energy needs. Without fertilizer in general, and
in particular ammonia, our nation's food and energy supply would be
adversely affected and the world would be without forty percent of
today's harvest.
    TFI and its anhydrous ammonia shipper members support DOT's
efforts for enhanced safety of tank cars, and the anhydrous ammonia
industry is committed to doing its part to minimize the occurrence
of accidents and to reduce the probability of a release should an
accident occur. We have been active participants in the Department
of Transportation's (DOT) efforts prior to the April 1 issuance of
the notice of proposed rulemaking for enhanced safety standards for
tank cars carrying toxic-by-inhalation materials. TFI members ship
approximately 52,000 carloads of anhydrous ammonia each year and own
or lease over 4,000 tank cars.
    Since the issuance of the proposal, and after testimony given
during public hearings held in May, it has become evident that there
is much confusion and concern not only by

shippers of anhydrous ammonia but from car manufacturers as well.
The timeline for compliance, the lack of focus by the Volpe Center
on an ammonia concept car, and the action by the Association of
American Railroads (AAR) to put into effect CPC 1187, are examples
of the concerns raised. Our specific concerns were detailed in
comments submitted to the docket on June 2. In our comments we point
out that car builders and leasing companies have not been willing to
renew current leases due to this confusion. As a result, an
unintentional consequence of the proposal will create a serious
shortage of cars needed in the near future for anhydrous ammonia.
Unless this situation is addressed, it could result in a switch to
truck or business interruptions.
    TFI has reviewed the petition for an interim standard for tank
cars used to transport toxic-by-inhalation (TIH) materials submitted
by the American Chemistry Council, American Short Line and Regional
Railroad Association, Association of American Railroads, The
Chlorine Institute and the Railway Supply Institute.
    TFI supports an interim standard for tank cars and many aspects
of the petition filed by the above associations. However, since
attempts to include stipulations for an interim anhydrous ammonia
tank car could not be agreed to by some of the associations above,
TFI submits this petition for an interim tank car standard for
anhydrous ammonia to DOT for consideration.

The Current Anhydrous Ammonia Tank Car

    The ammonia industry has specific reasons for requesting an
accommodation for the current 112J340W car:
     Making an accommodation will also allow more time for
infrastructure upgrades to handle the eventual 286,000 pound car.
Without an appropriate phase-in schedule, there could be serious
business interruptions in the marketplace or a switch to truck
transportation.
     The 112J340W cars in ammonia service are on average
only 10-12 years old. Without an extended life, there will be
reluctance for these car companies to remain in the ammonia market.
Some leasing companies have already indicated that they will not
renew leases upon expiration of the current lease agreements for the
112J340W ammonia tank cars due, in part, to uncertainties
surrounding this NPRM. This could cause a shortage of ammonia cars
available for lease and force ammonia shippers to find alternate
sources of transportation.
     The tank cars involved in the Minot, N.D. accident were
105J300W non-normalized cars with half head shields welded to the
jacket, tank and head thickness of .5625, and equipped with F double
shelf couplers. The typical 112J340W car, the current ammonia car,
built since 1989 has improved TC-128B normalized steel
specifications that include in excess of .608 heads and shells that
proved themselves in the Minot derailment. In response to the Minot
derailment, ammonia shippers voluntarily modernized their fleet of
ammonia tank cars, swapping out non-normalized steel cars (pre-1989
built) for normalized steel cars (post-1989 built). Ammonia shippers
have already spent considerable effort to change out their fleet
from the pre-1989 built car to the current 112J340W. These shippers
had the understanding that this effort would be considered with the
NPRM.

Interim Standard for Tank Cars in Anhydrous Ammonia Service

    TFI's petition requests that DOT consider the following for tank
cars in anhydrous ammonia service as an interim standard:
     Require the retirement of all ammonia pre-1989 non-
normalized steel cars by Dec. 31, 2010;
     Authorize the use of 112J340W ammonia cars built prior
to 2001 until Dec. 31, 2021;
     Authorize the use of 112J340W ammonia cars built after
2001 for a life of 20 years; and
     Authorize the use of an 112J400 pound car enhanced with
a thicker jacket for ammonia service beginning Jan. 1, 2009, with a
25 year service life from the date of the final ruling.

Summary

    In conclusion, the TFI suggests that the following timeline
concerning the design of anhydrous ammonia cars be considered:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Car type          Date car can be built         Service life
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pre-1989............  Not in production.......  Until December 31, 2010.
340.................  Until Jan. 1, 2009......  Pre-2001 built: To
                                                 December 31, 2021.
                                                Post-2001 built: 20
                                                 years from built date.
400/500.............  Jan. 1, 2009 until DOT    25 years from date of
                       final rule.               DOT final rule.
DOT.................  Effective date of final   Full life.
                       rule.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Ammonia shippers are voluntarily removing pre-1989 non-
normalized steel cars from their fleet and this has come at
considerable expense. The current 112J340W car has a full head
shield and the ammonia industry has voluntarily implemented a five
year, rather than ten year mandated, requalification test schedule.
    This overall plan is reasonable, makes sound business sense and
accomplishes the smooth transition of the ammonia car fleet. TFI and
its ammonia shipper members respectively request approval of our
request.

D. Purpose of the Notice

    The purpose of this Notice is to solicit comments on the merit of
petitions for rulemaking filed by Petitioner Group and TFI. Both
petitions request PHMSA to issue interim standards for tank cars used
for the transportation of TIH hazard material by railroad tank car. The
safety implications of the proposals in the petitions will be given
careful consideration as we determine whether regulatory action is
needed.

    Issued in Washington, DC on July 15, 2008 under authority
delegated in 49 CFR part 106.
Theodore L. Willke,
Associate Administrator for Hazardous Materials Safety.
[FR Doc. E8-16535 Filed 7-22-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-60-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 38 (Wednesday, February 26, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 10799]
[FR Doc No: 2014-04042]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. AD14-6-000]

New York Independent System Operator, Inc.; Supplemental Notice
of Technical Conference

    As announced in the Notice issued on January 28, 2014, the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) staff will hold a technical
conference on February 26, 2014, from 9:00 a.m. to approximately 1:00
p.m. (Eastern Time), to discuss with interested parties whether to
model Load Zone K as an export-constrained zone for future Demand Curve
reset proceedings.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ New York Indep. Sys. Operator, Inc., 144 FERC
61,126 (2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The conference will be held at the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426. The technical
conference will be led by staff, and will be open for the public to
attend. The conference will include a background presentation by New
York Independent System Operator, Inc. as well as technical questions
from Commission Staff. There will also be opportunities for comments
and questions from other conference attendees. The specific agenda and
procedures to be followed at the conference will be announced by staff
at the opening of the conference. Attendees should be prepared to
discuss the following:
    1. Whether Zone K (Long Island) can be modeled as export
constrained Load Zone.
    2. Whether Zone K should be included as a nested zone within the
current G-J Locality so that the larger zone would become a G-K
Locality. If not, what rationale supports allowing Zone K to be a
nested zone within NYCA, but not a nested zone within the G-J Locality?
Specifically, how can generation capacity located in Zone K be made
available to serve the reliability needs of Zones A-F but not the
reliability needs of Zones G-J?
    3. Whether sufficient transmission capability exists to allow at
least some capacity located in Zone K to reliably serve the needs of
loads in Zones G-J. If so, what limits, if any, should be placed on the
amount of capacity in Zone K that could be relied upon to serve the
needs of loads in Zones G-J? How should those limits be determined?
    The January 28, 2014 Notice of Technical Conference stated that
there will be a free webcast of the conference available. We will not
be able to provide webcasting for this event. However, those wishing to
receive teleconferencing should inform us by Monday, February 24, by
sending an email request to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please put
``teleconference request'' on the subject line, and include your name,
email and telephone number. Teleconference information will be emailed
to you by February 25, 2014. The technical conference will be
transcribed.
    Attendees may register in advance at the following Web page:
https://www.ferc.gov/whats-new/registration/zone-k-02-26-14-form.asp.
Advance registration is not required, but is encouraged. Parties
attending in person should still allow time to pass through building
security procedures before the 9:00 am (Eastern Time) start time of the
conference.
    Following the conference, the Commission will consider post-
technical conference comments submitted on or before March 26, 2014.
Answers to post-technical conference comments are due by close of
business on or before April 16, 2014.
    Commission conferences are accessible under section 508 of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973. For accessibility accommodations, please
send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll free 1-866-208-
3372 (voice) or<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY), or send a FAX to<PHONE_NUMBER> with
the required accommodations.
    All interested persons are permitted to attend. For more
information about the technical conference, please contact:

Adria M. Woods (Technical Information), Office of Energy Market
Regulation, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>Sarah McKinley (Logistical Information), Office of External Affairs,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: February 19, 2014.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-04042 Filed 2-25-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 52 (Friday, March 16, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15826-15827]
[FR Doc No: 2012-6387]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-66576; File No. SR-NYSE-2012-01]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC; Order
Approving a Proposed Rule Change To Establish an NYBX Immediate-or-
Cancel Order

March 12, 2012.

I. Introduction

    On January 11, 2012, the New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a
proposed rule change to amend NYSE Rule 1600 to establish a new order
type known as an ``NYBX IOC order.'' A NYBX IOC order would execute
exclusively against contra-side liquidity in the Exchange's Display
Book (``DBK'') and/or in the New York Block Exchange (``NYBX'' or
``Facility''). The proposed rule change was published for comment in
the Federal Register on January 30, 2012.\3\ The Commission received no
comment letters on the proposal. This order approves the proposed rule
change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 66218 (January 24,
2012), 77 FR 4604 (``Notice'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposed Rule Change

    NYBX is a facility of the Exchange and provides for electronic
matching and execution of non-displayed orders with the aggregate of
all displayed and non-displayed orders residing within NYBX and the
DBK.\4\ Only securities listed on NYSE are eligible to trade on
NYBX.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See NYSE Rule 1600(a).
    \5\ See NYSE Rule 1600(b)(2)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NYSE proposes to establish a new order type, the NYBX IOC order,
which is a limit order to buy or sell that is designated as immediate
or cancel and would be cancelled if the order is not immediately able
to execute, in whole or in part, exclusively against contra-side
liquidity in the DBK and/or NYBX at a price that is at or within the
national best bid or offer (``NBBO'').\6\ Any unexecuted portion of an
NYBX IOC order would be immediately cancelled. No portion of an NYBX
IOC order would be routed elsewhere, placed on the DBK, or remain in
the NYBX Facility. Instead the order would be cancelled back to the
User.\7\ Unlike other NYBX order types, the NYBX IOC order will not
allow a minimum triggering volume quantity (``MTV'') designation.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See proposed NYSE Rule 1600(c)(2)(D).
    \7\ See id.
    \8\ See id. See also NYSE Rule 1600(b)(2)(E).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A NYBX IOC order would be entered in the same manner as other NYBX
orders, as provided under NYSE Rule 1600(c)(1), and, except for the
optional time in force order parameters of NYSE Rule 1600(c)(3)(B)(i),
would be required to contain the order parameters listed in NYSE Rule
1600(c)(3)(A). A NYBX IOC order would be subject to order processing
set forth in NYSE Rule 1600(d)(1).\9\ In a situation in which the size
of the NYBX IOC order is less than the total available contra side
liquidity that is potentially executable within the limit price in the
NYBX and the DBK, the existing ``tie breaker'' rules set forth in NYSE
Rule 1600(d)(1)(C)(i) for routing decision purposes will provide that
an execution in the DBK has priority over an execution at the same
price in the NYBX.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Accordingly, as set forth in the Notice, the NYBX Facility
would apply the order execution process that is set forth in Rule
1600(d)(1)(C)(i) to NYBX IOC orders, including that an NYBX IOC
order may execute at multiple price points that may be available in
the DBK and NYBX Facility that are within the limit price of the
NYBX IOC order. Because by its terms, an NYBX IOC order does not
route to other markets, have an MTV, or leave a residual in the
NYBX, certain aspects of the order execution processing rules are
inapplicable, specifically NYSE Rules 1600(d)(1)(C)(ii)-(vi) and
1600(d)(1)(D).
    \10\ In the Notice, the Exchange provided the following example:
If a buy NYBX IOC order for 1,000 shares arrives at the Facility
with a limit price of $10.05, the Facility would review the
available contra-side liquidity in the DBK (both displayed and
undisplayed) and the NYBX. Assuming the contra-side liquidity in the
DBK is 300 shares at $10.04 (undisplayed), 200 shares at $10.05 (NBO
displayed), and 200 shares at $10.05 (undisplayed), and in the NYBX
is 200 shares at $10.05, the NYBX IOC buy order would simultaneously
be routed to DBK as 300 shares at $10.04 and 400 shares at $10.05,
and 200 shares would execute in the Facility at $10.05, for a total
execution of 900 shares. The remaining 100 shares of the buy NYBX
IOC order would be cancelled. Assuming the buy NYBX IOC order is
instead for 700 shares, pursuant to the tie-breaker rule in NYSE
Rule 1600(d)(1)(C)(i), the full volume of the order would route to
the DBK, executing 300 shares at $10.04 and 400 shares at $10.05,
and the Facility's 200 share contra-side order at $10.05 would not
be filled.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Since NYBX IOC order would not be routed elsewhere, if another
automated trading center is displaying a better price than either the
NYBX or the DBK, and an execution in the NYBX Facility or DBK would
result in a trade through in violation of Regulation NMS, the NYBX IOC
order would be cancelled. Likewise, if another automated trading center
is displaying prices that are the same or inferior to prices in the
NYBX or the DBK, and routing is not required by Regulation NMS, the
NYBX IOC order would execute within the DBK and/or the NYBX without
routing to such automated trading center.
    NYSE also proposes certain technical changes to NYSE Rule 1600.
First, the Exchange proposes to amend NYSE Rule 1600(g) to add
references to trading pauses in individual securities, as provided for
under NYSE Rule 80C. Second, because the Exchange has eliminated the
class of market participants formerly known as Registered Competitive
Market Makers, the Exchange proposes to delete NYSE Rule 1600(h)(3),
which is no longer applicable.\11\ Third, the Exchange proposes to
clarify NYSE Rule 1600(b)(2)(D) that NYBX orders are defined within
NYSE Rule 1600(c)(2), not only within NYSE Rule 1600(c)(2)(A) as is
currently reflected.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 60356 (July 21,
2009), 74 FR 37281 (July 28, 2009) (SR-NYSE-2009-08) (Rescinding
Rules 110 and 107A, which established the roles of Competitive
Traders and Registered Competitive Market Makers).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion and Commission's Findings

    After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities
exchange.\12\ In particular, the Commission finds that the proposed
rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\13\ which
requires, among other things, that the rules of a national securities
exchange be designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts,
promote just and equitable principles of trade, remove

impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and
a national market system. The proposal appears reasonably designed to
provide NYBX users flexibility and greater control over how their
orders interact with available liquidity. The Commission notes that the
proposal is consistent with the order protection rule of Regulation
NMS, because an NYBX IOC order would not be permitted to trade through
a protected quotation of another automated trading center.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission
notes that it has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\14\ that the proposed rule change (SR-NYSE-2012-01) be, and it
hereby is, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-6387 Filed 3-15-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P