[Federal Register: September 25, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 185)]
[Notices]
[Page 55817-55819]
[DOCID:fr25se06-57]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-54461; File No. SR-NASD-2006-106]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Association of Securities
Dealers, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed
Rule Change Related to Market/Limit-on-Open Orders Sent to the American
Stock Exchange or New York Stock Exchange

September 15, 2006.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on September 11, 2006, the National Association of Securities Dealers,
Inc. (``NASD''), through its subsidiary, The Nasdaq Stock Market, Inc.
(``Nasdaq''), filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and
II below, which Items have been prepared by Nasdaq. Nasdaq has filed
the proposal pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \3\ and Rule
19b-4(f)(6) thereunder,\4\ which renders the proposal effective upon
filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change

    Nasdaq proposes to establish a new order processing option for its
INET and Brut facilities that allow those system users to direct that
their market/limit-on-open orders being sent to the American Stock
Exchange (``Amex'') or New York Stock Exchange (``NYSE'') for
participation in those markets'' opening processes have any shares
remaining unexecuted after the open be returned to the Nasdaq facility
of their origin for display and potential execution, as appropriate.
Nasdaq has designated this proposal as non-controversial and has
requested that the Commission waive the 30-day pre-operative waiting
period contained in Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) under the Act.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is below. Proposed new
language is italicized.
* * * * *

4903. Order Entry Parameters

    (a)-(b) No Change.
    (c) Thru Brut Orders--
    (1) General. A Thru Brut Order is an order submitted to the System
that is designated for routing to another market center. The following
requirements shall apply to Thru Brut Orders:
    (A)-(B) No Change.
    (C) Market/Limit on Open Orders--if requested by the entering
party, unexecuted share amounts of market on open orders directed to
the New York or American stock exchanges will be returned to the System
for display and potential execution.
    (d)-(f) No Change.
* * * * *

4956. Routing

    (a) INET Order Routing Process.
    (1) The INET Order Routing Process shall be available to
Participants from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. Eastern Time, and shall route orders
as described below:
    (A)-(B) No Change.
    (C) Market/Limit on Open Orders.
    If requested by the entering party, unexecuted share amounts of
market on open orders directed to the New York or American stock
exchanges will be returned to the INET System for display and potential
execution.
* * * * *

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, Nasdaq included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. Nasdaq has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A,
B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    Nasdaq proposes to provide a new voluntary option for its INET and
Brut facilities that would allow users to direct that, for orders being
sent to the NYSE or Amex for participation in those markets' opening
process, thereafter return any unexecuted share amounts back to the
originating facility for display and potential execution. Currently,
such share amounts are automatically cancelled back to the entering
party, and Nasdaq wishes give its facility users the ability to elect
to have those unexecuted remainders to instead continue to participate
in Nasdaq's automated execution environment. Nasdaq believes that the
above option would enhance the choices available to users of the INET
and Brut systems to select the best method to execute proprietary and
customer orders across multiple trading venues.
2. Statutory Basis
    Nasdaq believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with
the provisions of Section 15A of the Act,\6\ in general, and with
Section 15A(b)(6) of the Act,\7\ in particular, in that it is designed
to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote
just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to a free
and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to
protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3.
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    Nasdaq does not believe that the proposed rule change will result
in any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants or Others

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action

    The foregoing proposed rule change is subject to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \8\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder \9\
because the proposal: (i) Does not significantly affect the protection
of investors or the public interest; (ii) does not impose any
significant burden on competition; and (iii) does not become operative
prior to 30 days after the date of filing or such shorter time as the
Commission may designate if consistent with the protection of investors
and the public interest; provided that Nasdaq has given the Commission
notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a
brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at least five
business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule change,
or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \9\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Nasdaq has fulfilled the five-day pre-filing requirement. Nasdaq
has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay. The
Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is
consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest
because such waiver would immediately provide users of Nasdaq's INET
and Brut facilities the choice to have unexecuted remainders of certain
orders either continue to participate in Nasdaq's automated execution
environment or be automatically cancelled. For these reasons, the
Commission designates the proposed rule change to be effective and
operative upon filing with the Commission.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ For purposes only of accelerating the operative date of
this proposal, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's
impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule
change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it
appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate
in the public interest, for the protection of investors or otherwise in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml.
); or     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include

File Number SR-NASD-2006-106 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASD-2006-106. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml
). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all

written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and
copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of the filing
also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal
office of the NASD. All comments received will be posted without
change; the Commission does

not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASD-2006-106 and should be
submitted on or before October 16, 2006.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 06-8143 Filed 9-22-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 103 (Tuesday, May 29, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 31551-31562]
[FR Doc No: 2012-12832]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

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

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

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

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

ACTION: Advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM).

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

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

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

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kevin Leary or Robert Benedict,
Standards and Rulemaking Division, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials
Safety Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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

I. Executive Summary

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

II. Background

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

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

III. Summary Review of Amendments Considered

A. Petitions for Rulemaking

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

B. Special Permits

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

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

IV. Regulatory Review and Analysis

A. Statutory/Legal Authority for This ANPRM

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

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

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

C. Executive Order 13132

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

D. Executive Order 13175

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

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

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

F. Paperwork Reduction Act

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

G. Regulation Identifier Number (RIN)

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

H. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

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

I. Environmental Assessment

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

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

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

J. Privacy Act

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

K. International Trade Analysis

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

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