[Federal Register: February 10, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 27)]
[Notices]
[Page 6741-6743]
[DOCID:fr10fe10-130]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-61489; File No. SR-CBOE-2010-008]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Inc.; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change Relating to Co-Location
Service Fees

February 4, 2010.
    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 January 28, 2010, Chicago Board Options Exchange, Inc. (``CBOE'' or
the ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II
and III below, which Items have been prepared by CBOE. 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Chicago Board Options Exchange, Inc. (``CBOE'' or ``Exchange'')
proposes to amend its Fees Schedule relating to co-location service
fees. The text of the proposed rule change is available on the
Exchange's Web site (http://www.cboe.org/legal), at the Exchange's
principal office, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, CBOE 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. CBOE 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
    For a monthly fee, the Exchange provides members with cabinet space
in CBOE's building for placement of network and server hardware. The
fee is $10 per month per ``U'' of shelf space (which is equal to 1.75
inches).\3\ A member also receives power, cooling, security and
assistance with installation and connection of the equipment to the
Exchange's servers, at no additional charge. This ``co-location
service'' provides members with close physical proximity to the
Exchange's electronic trading system, which helps meet their need for
high performance processing and low latency.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57191 (January 24,
2008), 73 FR 5611 (January 30, 2008). The fee for a Sponsored User
is $20 per month per ``U''. See Securities Exchange Act Release No.
58189 (July 18, 2008), 73 FR 43274 (July 24, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The co-location service is available to any member that requests
the service and pays the monthly fee.\4\ The Exchange believes that for
the foreseeable future it has sufficient space to accommodate all
members who may request the co-location service. Other than the co-
location service, the Exchange does not provide any co-locating member
with any advantage over any other co-locating member or any non-co-
locating member with respect to access to the Exchange's trading
system. The Exchange's systems are designed to minimize, to the extent
possible, any advantage for one member over another. The foregoing
statements apply equally to both inbound and outbound data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ A member using the co-location service may also pay certain
CBOEdirect Connectivity Charges that are set forth in Section 16 of
the Fees Schedule. These fees are charged for member connectivity to
CBOEdirect regardless of whether or not a member is using the co-
location service. These fees include a $40 per month ``CMi
Application Server'' fee for server hardware used to connect to the
CBOE CMi API, a $40 per month ``Network Access Port'' fee for use of
the CMi API and a $40 per month ``FIX Port'' fee for use of the FIX
API. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57191, supra footnote
1. Each of the foregoing fees are $80 per month for a Sponsored
User. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58189, supra footnote
1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to clarify its Fees Schedule relating to co-
location fees in a couple of respects. First, the Exchange proposes to
move the co-location fees from Section 17 of the Fees Schedule (Hybrid
Fees) to Section 8 (Facility Fees) because these fees are more
accurately described as facility fees. Second, the Exchange proposes to
clarify that the co-location fees are charged in increments of 4 ``U''
(which is equal to 7 inches) because the cabinet space is available in
4 U increments.
2. Statutory Basis
    By clarifying the Exchange's fees for its co-location service and
providing a fuller description of the service, the Exchange believes
the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934,\5\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Section 6(b)(4) \6\ of the Act in particular, in that it
is designed to provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues,
fees, and other charges among its members and other persons using its
facilities. In addition, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change
furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) \7\ of the Act in that it is
designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and
a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the
public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the
proposed rule change.

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

    Within 35 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period (i) as the Commission may
designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to
be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:
    (A) By order approve such proposed rule change, or
    (B) Institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be disapproved.

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-CBOE-2010-008 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2010-008. 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 Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. 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-
CBOE-2010-008 and should be submitted on or before March 3, 2010.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-2946 Filed 2-9-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 219 (Wednesday, November 15, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 52899-52901]
[FR Doc No: 2017-24722]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-2016-0268; FRL-9970-75-OECA]

Clean Water Act Class II: Proposed Administrative Settlement,
Penalty Assessment and Opportunity To Comment Regarding Enel Green
Power North America, Inc.

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has entered into a
Consent Agreement with ENEL Green Power North America, Inc. (EGPNA or
Respondent) to resolve violations of the Clean Water Act (CWA), the
Clean Air Act (CAA), the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
and the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) and
their implementing regulations.
    The Administrator is hereby providing public notice of this Consent
Agreement and proposed Final Order (CAFO), and providing an opportunity
for interested persons to comment on the CWA, CAA, RCRA and EPCRA
portions of the CAFO, pursuant to CWA Sections 309(g)(4)(A) and
311(b)(6)(C), 33 U.S.C. 1319(g)(4)(A) and 33 U.S.C. 1321(b)(6)(C). Upon
closure of the public comment period, the CAFO and any public comments
will be forwarded to the Agency's Environmental Appeals Board (EAB).

DATES: Comments are due on or before December 15, 2017.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
2016-0268, to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or withdrawn. The
EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not
submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must
be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered
the official comment and should include discussion of all points you
wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment
contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the web,
cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission
methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or
multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective
comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peter W. Moore, Water Enforcement
Division, Office of Civil Enforcement (2243-A), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    This proposed settlement agreement is the result of voluntary
disclosures of CWA, CAA, RCRA and EPCRA violations by EGPNA to the EPA.
EGPNA is an electric energy producing company which specializes in
producing clean energy from renewable sources (i.e., from hydro, solar,
wind, geothermal and biomass sources) in lieu of carbon-based energy
sources. EGPNA is incorporated in 1985 in the State of Massachusetts.
EGPNA is located at 100 Brickstone Square, Ste 300, Andover,
Massachusetts 01810.
    On October 12, 2012, the EPA and Respondent entered into a
corporate audit agreement pursuant to the Agency's policy on Incentives
for Self-Policing: Discovery, Disclosure, Correction and Prevention of
Violations (Audit Policy), 65 FR 19,618 (Apr. 11, 2000), in which
Respondent agreed to conduct a systematic, documented, and objective
review of its compliance with applicable provisions of the CWA, CAA,
RCRA and EPCRA. Respondent agreed to submit a final audit report
detailing the specific facilities assessed, information setting forth
violations discovered, and corrective actions taken. Respondent
ultimately audited a total of 77 facilities, as documented in
Respondent's November 14, 2012 and final audit report and the March 7,
2013 supplemental audit report.
    All violations discovered and disclosed by the Respondent are
listed in Attachments A and B to the CAFO.

Proposed Settlement

    The EPA determined that Respondent satisfactorily completed its
audit and has met all conditions set forth in the Audit Policy for the
violations identified in Attachment A of the CAFO. Therefore, 100
percent of the gravity-based penalty calculated for the violations
identified in Attachment A of the CAFO is being waived.
    Attachment B of the CAFO identifies certain CWA violations that did
not meet Condition V of the Audit Policy requiring correction of the
violation within 60 days of discovery. For these violations, a gravity-
based penalty of $22,373 is assessed.
    For all violations listed in Attachments A and B, EPA calculated an
economic benefit of noncompliance of $54,624. This number was
calculated using specific cost information provided by Respondent and
use of the Economic Benefit (BEN) computer model.
    EGPNA has agreed to pay a total civil penalty of $76,997 for all
the violations identified in Attachments A and B of the CAFO. Of this
amount, $54,624 is the economic benefit of noncompliance and $22,373 is
the gravity-based penalty for the violations listed in Attachment B of
the CAFO.
    Of this total amount, $633 is attributable to the CAA violations,
$49,817 is attributable to the CWA NPDES violations, $23,946 is
attributable to the CWA SPCC violations, $907 is attributable to the
RCRA violations, and $1,664 is attributable to the EPCRA violations.
    The EPA and Respondent negotiated the Consent Agreement in
accordance with the Consolidated Rules of Practice, 40 CFR part 22,
specifically 40 CFR 22.13(b) and 22.18(b) (In re: ENEL Green Power
North America, Inc..; enforcement settlement identifier numbers CWA-HQ-
2015-8003, RCRA-HQ-2015-8003, CAA-HQ-2015-8003 and EPCRA-HQ-2015-8003).
This Consent Agreement is subject to public notice and comment under
Section 311(b)(6)(C) of the CWA, 33 U.S.C. 1321(b)(6)(C). The
procedures by which the public may comment on a proposed CWA Class II
penalty order, or participate in a Class II penalty proceeding, are set
forth in 40 CFR 22.45. The deadline for submitting public comment on
this proposed Final Order is [insert date 30 days after date of
publication in the Federal Register]. All comments will be transferred
to the EAB for consideration. The EAB's powers and duties are outlined
in 40 CFR 22.4(a).

Disclosed and Corrected Violations

CWA

    Respondent disclosed that it failed to prepare and implement a
Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan in violation
of CWA Section 311(j), 33 U.S.C. 1321(j), and the implementing
regulations found at 40 CFR part 112, at eighteen (18) facilities
located in Idaho, Kansas, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Hampshire,
Nevada, New York, Oklahoma, Texas, Washington, and

West Virginia,, identified in Attachment A and listed below.

Bypass, 2371 East 1100, South Hazelton, ID 83335
Hazelton, 2310 East 930, Hazelton, ID 83335
Caney River, 1205 Road 7, Howard, KS 67353
Caney River, 1206 Road 7, Howard, KS 67353
Lawrence, 9 South Broadway, Lawrence, MA 01840
Minnesota Wind, 112 Center St, Lake Bento, MN 56151
Sweetwater, 340 Plains Road, Claremont NH, 03743
Somersworth, 83 Olde Mill Road, Somersworth, NH 03879
Salt Wells, 6059 Salt Wells Road, Fallon, NV 89406
Stillwater Geo, 4785 Lawrence Lane, Fallon, NV 89406
Stillwater Solar, 4789 Lawrence Lane, Fallon, NV 89406
Wethersfield Wind, 4179 Poplar Tree Road, Gainesville, NY 14066
LaChute Lower, Elk Drive, Ticonderoga, NY 12884
Fenner, 5508 Selinger Road, Cazenovia, NY 13035
Rocky Ridge, 13237 N2240, Hobart, OK 73651
Snyder Wind Farm, 836 Country Road, Hemleigh, TX 79527
Twin Falls, 49032 Southeast 177th Street, North Bend, WA 98045
Gauley, Gauley River Power Partners, Summersville, WVA 26651

    Under CWA Section 311(b)(6)(A), 33 U.S.C. 1321(b)(6)(A), any owner,
operator, or person in charge of a vessel, onshore facility, or
offshore facility from which oil is discharged in violation of CWA
Section 311(b)(3), 33 U.S.C. 1321(b)(3), or who fails or refuses to
comply with any regulations that have been issued under CWA Section
311(j), 33 U.S.C. 1321(j), may be assessed an administrative civil
penalty of up to $177,500 by the EPA. Class II proceedings under CWA
Section 311(b)(6), 33 U.S.C. 1321(b)(6), are conducted in accordance
with 40 CFR part 22. As authorized by CWA Section 311(b)(6), 33 U.S.C.
1321(b)(6), the EPA has assessed a civil penalty for these violations.
    Pursuant to CWA Section 311(b)(6)(C), 33 U.S.C. 1321(b)(6)(C), the
EPA will not issue an order in this proceeding prior to the close of
the public comment period.
    Respondent disclosed that it violated CWA Sections 301(a), 33
U.S.C. 1311(a) and Section 402(a), 33 U.S.C. 1342(a) and implementing
regulations found at 40 CFR part 122 at twenty-six (26) facilities
located in Georgia, Idaho, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York,
North Carolina, South Carolina, Vermont, Virginia, and identified in
Attachments A and B and listed below.

Milstead, Main Street, Conyers, GA 30207
Barber Dam, 5456 Warm Springs Ave, Boise ID 8371
Hazelton, 2310 East 930, Hazelton, ID 83335
Bypass, 2371 East 1100 South Hazelton, ID 83335
Dietrich Drop, 5 mi S of Dietrich on Milner, Dietrich Drop, ID 83324
Elk Creek, 176 Elk Lake Road, New Meadows, ID 83655
GeoBon--Notch Butte, 120 West Road, Shoshone, ID 83352
Crescent, 1191 Huntington Road, Russell, MA 01702
Glendale, Route 184, Stockbridge, MA 01263
Low Line Rapids, 5 mi S, 1 mi W of Kimberly, Kimberly, ID 83343
Rock Creek, Canyon Springs Road 2.3mi W, 1.2S, Twin Falls, ID 83304
Lower Valley, 131 Sullivan Street, Claremont, NH 03744
Sweetwater, 341 Plains Road, Claremont, NH 03744
Rollinsford, 2 \1/2\ Front Street, Rollinsford, NH 03786
Mascoma, Route 12A, West Lebanon, NH 03785
Woodsville, 4 North Court Street, Woodsville, NH 03786
EHC, 1965 Maple Street, West Hopkinton, NH 03229
Somersworth, 83 Olde Mill Road, Somersworth, NH 03879
Groveville, Route 52, Beacon, NY 12508
High Shoals, River Street, High Shoals, NC 28208
Piedmont, Highway 86, Piedmont, SC 29673
Ware Shoals, Powerhouse Road, Ware Shoals, SC 26962
Sheldon Springs, 122 Heather Lane, Sheldon Springs, VT 05486
Ottauquechee, 47 Mill Street, N. Hartland, VT 05053
Barnet, Route 7, Barnet, VT 05083
Fries, Highway 95, Fries, VA 24331

    Under CWA Section 309(a) and (g)(2)(B), 33 U.S.C. 1319(a) and
(g)(2)(B), any person who is in violation of any condition or
limitation which implements section 301, 302, 306, 307, 308, 318, or
405 of this title in a permit issued by a State under an approved
permit program under section 402 or 404 of this title may be assessed
an administrative penalty of up to $177,500 by the EPA. Class II
proceedings under CWA Section 309(g)(2)(B), 33 U.S.C. 1319(g)(2)(B),
are conducted in accordance with 40 CFR part 22. As authorized by CWA
Section 309(g)(2)(B), 33 U.S.C. 1319(g)(2)(B), the EPA has assessed a
civil penalty for these violations.

CAA

    Respondent disclosed that it violated CAA Section 110, 42 U.S.C.
7410 and Nevada State Implementation Plan for operating under a Class
II Air Quality Operating Permit that imposes emission limits,
monitoring, testing, and reporting requirements for failing to maintain
records or report significant losses of isobutane during routine
maintenance. The facilities are located in the State of Nevada.
    Under CAA Section 113(d), 42 U.S.C. 7413(d), the Administrator may
issue an administrative penalty order to any person who has violated or
is in violation of any applicable requirement or prohibition of the
CAA, including any rule, order, waiver, permit, or plan. Proceedings
under CAA Section 113(d), 42 U.S.C. 7413(d), are conducted in
accordance with 40 CFR part 22. The EPA, as authorized by the CAA, has
assessed a civil penalty for these violations.

RCRA

    Respondent disclosed that it failed to comply with RCRA Section
3002 of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6922, and the regulations found at 40 CFR part
265, 273, and 279, at sixty (60)) facilities listed in Attachment A of
the CAFO when it failed to conduct waste accumulation and storage
inspections; maintain proper universal waste disposal and handling
practices for spent fluorescent lamps and tubes; and by failing to
maintain waste oil in accordance with the regulations. These sixty (60)
facilities are located in the following states: California,
Connecticut, Georgia, Idaho, Kansas, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota,
Oklahoma, Nevada, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, South
Carolina Vermont, Virginia and Washington, West Virginia.
    Under RCRA Section 3008, 42 U.S.C. 6928, the Administrator may
issue an order assessing a civil penalty for any past or current
violation the RCRA. Proceedings under RCRA Section 3008, 42 U.S.C.
6928, are conducted in accordance with 40 CFR part 22. The EPA, as
authorized by the RCRA, has assessed a civil penalty for these
violations.

EPCRA

    Respondent disclosed that it violated EPCRA Section 302(c), 42
U.S.C. 11002(c), and the implementing regulations found at 40 CFR part
355, at three (3) facilities listed in Attachment

A when it failed to notify the State Emergency Response Commission
(SERC) and/or the Local Emergency Planning Committee (LEPC) that these
facilities are subject to the requirements of Section 302(c) of EPCRA.
These three (3) facilities are located in the following states: Kansas
and New Hampshire.
    Respondent disclosed that it violated EPCRA Section 311(a), 42
U.S.C. 11021(a), and the implementing regulations found at 40 CFR part
370, at three (3) facilities listed in Attachment A when it failed to
submit a Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) for a hazardous chemical(s)
and/or extremely hazardous substance(s) or, in the alternative, a list
of such chemicals, to the LEPCs, SERCs, and the fire departments with
jurisdiction over these facilities. These three (3) facilities are
located in the following states: Kansas and New Hampshire.
    Respondent disclosed that it violated EPCRA Section 312(a), 42
U.S.C. 11022(a), and the implementing regulations found at 40 CFR part
370, at three (3) facilities listed in Attachment A when it failed to
prepare and submit emergency and chemical inventory forms to the LEPCs,
SERCs, and the fire departments with jurisdiction over these
facilities. These three (3) facilities are located in the following
states: Kansas and New Hampshire.
    Under EPCRA Section 325, 42 U.S.C. 11045, the Administrator may
issue an administrative order assessing a civil penalty against any
person who has violated applicable emergency planning or right-to-know
requirements, or any other requirement of EPCRA. Proceedings under
EPCRA Section 325, 42 U.S.C. 11045, are conducted in accordance with 40
CFR part 22. The EPA, as authorized by EPCRA Section 325, 42 U.S.C.
11045, has assessed a civil penalty for these violations.

List of Subjects

    Environmental protection.

    Dated: October 27, 2017.
Rosemarie Kelley,
Acting Director, Office of Civil Enforcement, Office of Enforcement and
Compliance Assurance.
[FR Doc. 2017-24722 Filed 11-14-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


trans-loaded to an approved portable tank. The trans-load costs and
increased risks would make it impractical to ship product worldwide
and this would prove a barrier to International trade which may harm
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
both the USA and third party economies.

    Similarly, the International Tank Container Organisation states:

    We anticipate that UN Portable tanks inspected by other non-IACS
members would be stopped in transit and dangerous goods would need
to be trans-loaded (as has been the case) to an approved portable
tank (increasing both cost and risk, exponentially, as most
incidents happen during load/unload operations).

    PHMSA does not intend to change the established process of using
IACS preferred member Approval Agencies \19\ with regard to portable
tanks, nor the HMR process of authorization for foreign approval
agencies (see 49 CFR 107.402). As stated above, under this NPRM the
inspection of a cryogenic portable tank, whether ASME ``U'' or ``T''
marked, would follow current HMR requirements in that the manufacture
or repair of the pressure vessel would be subject to an Authorized
Inspector in addition to the involvement of an Approval Agency.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ IACS is a membership organization that endorses member
foreign approval tank inspection agencies as ``preferred approval
agencies.'' Foreign enforcement and port authorities recognize these
inspection agencies over non- IACS preferred inspection agencies
according to IACS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    PHMSA, by proposing to incorporate Section XII and the 2013 edition
of the NBIC as alternatives to the current regulatory system is not
lessening safety, or creating barriers to international trade that
would harm U.S. or third-party economies. On the contrary, PHMSA
believes that the proposed rulemaking will help the U.S. economy by
allowing the manufacture and repair of an internationally competitive
product.
    Furthermore, the ASME standards have been deemed equivalent by
PHMSA technical staff and have been proven to provide, through special
permits, an equivalent level of safety to that of tanks constructed and
designed according to the specifications currently provided in the HMR.
For example, special permits SP-05749; SP-10481; and SP-12630, SP-
14710, SP-14467, 14437, providing similar flexibility in materials of
construction as provided by Section XII, allow reduced shell thickness
and alternatives to the materials of construction specified in the HMR
for portable tanks and cargo tanks. These permits have been in use for
decades with over 13,000 shipments and no reported incidents.

Voluntary Consensus Standards Are Inherently Inconsistent With the
Administrative Procedures Act

    Nine additional commenters generally oppose the incorporation of
voluntary consensus standards.\20\ NPGA opposes ``DOT reliance on a
third (3rd) party to write regulations that have such a profound impact
on our industry.'' This sentiment is representative of the many
commenters opposed to incorporation of the standards because they are
developed by voluntary consensus organizations. The commenters are
concerned that they would no longer have a voice in changes to the
regulations. They also are concerned that the changes made would no
longer be transparent. Silver/CIMS LLC states:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ Baltimore Cargo Tank Services, Inc., Dangerous Goods
Advisory Council, J & S Transport Company, Inc., Jerry White,
National Propane Gas Association, National Tank Truck Carriers,
Inc., Silver CIMS, LLC, Tank Truck Manufacturers Association,
Vulcraft of New York.

    The UN and IMO Portable tank Industry have had NO input in the
development of ASME or NBIC proposed rules. USDOT should NOT adopt
ASME Chapter XII or NBIC for any other purpose as the publications
are NOT International Consensus Standards for UN Portable tank
construction or use. If USDOT were to replace 49 CFR 100-180 with
ASME and NBIC, the UN Portable tank Industry stakeholders would be
hamstrung in their abilities to influence future rules and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
regulations.

    While we understand the concerns regarding incorporating voluntary
consensus standards, PHMSA and many other Federal agencies often
incorporate by reference standards developed by industry experts. In
fact, the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995,
Public Law 104-113, requires agencies to use technical standards that
are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies unless
the use of such a standard is inconsistent with applicable law or is
otherwise impractical. Public Law 104-113 requires Federal agencies to
use industry consensus standards to the extent practical; it does not
require Federal agencies to endorse a standard in its entirety. The law
does not prohibit an agency from generally adopting a voluntary
consensus standard while taking exception to specific portions of the
standard if those provisions are deemed to be ``inconsistent with
applicable law or otherwise impractical.'' Taking specific exceptions
furthers the Congressional intent of Federal reliance on voluntary
consensus standards because it allows the adoption of substantial
portions of consensus standards without the need to reject the
standards in their entirety because of limited provisions that are not
acceptable to the agency.
    It has been PHMSA's practice to review new editions and addenda of
the ASME BPVC and NBIC and periodically update Sec.  171.7 to
incorporate newer editions and addenda by reference. New editions of
the subject codes will be issued every two years. The BPVC was last
incorporated by reference into the regulations under Docket No. RSPA-
99-6213 (HM-218) (August 18, 2000; 65 FR 50450). In that final rule,
Sec.  171.7 was revised to incorporate by reference the 1998 edition of
Sections II (Parts A and B), V, VIII (Division I) and IX, of the BPVC.
The NBIC 1992 Edition was incorporated by reference under Docket HM-
183C (November 3, 1994; 59 FR 55162). We intend to continue to review
these standards, and either incorporate them in their entirety,
incorporate portions of these standards, or not incorporate them,
depending on the outcome of our review. Furthermore, we intend to be
active participants in the development of future editions of Section
XII and the NBIC.
    Alloy Custom Products, NPGA and NTTC expressed concern that
interpretations of the standards would not be readily available through
PHMSA. As stated earlier, engineers at PHMSA were instrumental in the
development of the standards, they understand them, and are available
to help interpret them. As with other highly technical or scientific
standards that we incorporate in the HMR, PHMSA's Hazardous Materials
Information Center staff will have access to the engineers who helped
develop the standards. PHMSA seeks comment on the availability of
interpretations of Section XII and the NBIC, specifically, if

access to interpretations through ASME and PHMSA would be sufficient.
    Finally, as mentioned above the meetings of both ASME and the NBIC
are free-of-charge and open to public participation. ASME subcommittees
consider correspondence from the general public in the form of requests
for interpretation and revision to existing codes, requests for code
cases, and requests to develop new standards. The NBIC subcommittees
consider correspondence from the general public in the form of requests
for interpretation, revision of existing standards, and requests to
develop new standards. The standards-writing subcommittees, subgroups,
and task groups are open to participation by representatives of groups
that are materially affected by the code. Each year the NBIC Committee
updates the NBIC and presents the updates on the National Board's Web
site for public review in April-May and August-September.

Miscellaneous Comments

    In addition to the comments in support and in opposition to the
ANPRM some comments were neither in support or opposed and offered
other insights and suggestions. These comments are categorized and
discussed further below.

Separate Section XII from the NBIC

    CTI and Gardner stated that PHMSA should separate into two separate
rulemakings the incorporation of the NBIC and that of Section XII.
Gardner states that:

    Our reservations on NBIC are based on the difficulties in
implementing two new items simultaneously. We would recommend that
Section XII be adopted as soon as possible with the existing DOT
Registered Engineers and Inspectors while giving the interested
parties extended time to familiarize, discuss and comment on NBIC
for eventual adoption in two to three years.

    Since Section XII was developed to be used in conjunction with the
NBIC, and that there would be no provision for continued maintenance or
inspections of tanks built to Section XII in the HMR if the latest NBIC
is not incorporated at the same time, we cannot incorporate them at
separate times.

Standards Are Not Accurate

    Alloy Custom Products voiced concern that ``the rules for ASME Sec
XII and NBIC should not be adopted as presently written and they should
be sent back to the respective organizations for correction and
modification.'' There were no specific errors cited; however, the
latest editions of both standards were published in 2013. They are up-
to-date and correct typographical errors, and clarify and simplify the
previous editions. As with most in-depth, detailed publications, later
editions of these standards include updates and corrections.

Replacing Standards Would Create a Monopoly

    James K. Victory and NTTC indicated that incorporating the
standards would create a monopoly. Victory stated that ``the only
profiteers from this being ASME and the National Board of Pressure
Vessel Inspectors.'' PHMSA thanks James K. Victory and NTTC for their
comments. We will take this view into consideration. However, as
mentioned above, we are proposing to adopt Section XII and the 2013
edition of the NBIC as alternatives to Section VIII, Division 1 and the
HMR, stakeholders will be provided more options.
Adopt Standards As Alternative
    Four commenters suggested that if we do incorporate Section XII and
the NBIC, we should only do so as an alternative, not a replacement to
Section VIII, Division 1 and the HMR.\21\ TTMA explains that:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ Heil, International Tank Container Organisation, Silver/
CIMS LLC, and Truck Trailer Manufacturers Association.

    This approach will give the regulated community the option of
employing the effective existing regulations, or these other
publications. We anticipate the vast majority of industry
stakeholders will choose the existing HMR for their code compliance
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
basis.

    We agree, and in this NPRM, we are proposing to take this suggested
approach, and we believe this will diffuse much of the opposition to
the new codes and allow manufacturers greater flexibility.

Proposed Amendments

    In this NPRM, PHMSA is proposing to incorporate Section XII, with
limited exceptions, as an alternative to existing standards for the
following tanks: DOT Specification 331, 338, 406, 407, and 412 cargo
tanks, cryogenic portable tanks, and ton tanks. Section VIII, Division
1 applies to construction of new tanks only, and requires that they are
marked with a ``U'' stamp to indicate that they constructed and
certified in accordance with that section. Section XII applies to both
new construction and continued service, and tanks constructed under
this standard will be marked with a ``T.'' Tanks that are repaired
under Section XII would be marked with the ``TR'' stamp. Further, PHMSA
is proposing to adopt the 2013 edition of the NBIC for alterations,
repairs and inspections performed on all ASME constructed tanks used
for the transportation of hazardous materials as an alternative to the
1992 edition that is currently incorporated by reference. The 2013 NBIC
may be used for tanks constructed to the specifications set forth in
Section VIII, Division 1. While the use of the 2013 edition of the NBIC
would be optional under this proposed rulemaking, PHMSA believes that
most manufacturers building to Section VIII, Division 1 would choose to
use the 2013 edition of the NBIC as it is more current. Under this
proposed rule, the 2013 edition of the NBIC must be used for tanks
constructed to the specification set forth in Section XII.
    The research and development projects summarized in Section V and
Table 11 of Section VII of this NPRM support the proposed codes and
standards to be adopted in this rulemaking. These research and
development projects are available in the public docket for this
rulemaking. From the results of the studies and its own analysis, PHMSA
has concluded that the proposed standards, as described in this NPRM,
provide an equivalent level of safety to the current standards.
    Furthermore, by providing the 2013 edition of the NBIC and Section
XII as options, industry may choose modern materials to fabricate
tanks, enabling the use of different, equally safe, materials
predicated on market value.\22\ The assortment of materials described
in Section XII include different formulations of carbon steel and
alloy/stainless steel, such as Chromium-Nickel Stainless Steel,
Chromium-Molybdenum-Vanadium alloy steel, and titanium alloy. Section
XII also includes specifications for steel fabrication and treatment,
such as tempering, quenching, and forging (See Section XII Part TM).
This variety of approved materials will enable U.S. manufacturers to
better compete internationally. It will allow for greater capacity per
tank, and reduce the number of tanks on highways in certain
circumstances. This reduction of motor vehicles hauling hazardous
materials on the highways would reduce the potential for hazardous
material

incidents, and consequently, improve safety.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ PHMSA has authorized through special permit some of these
new materials authorized in ASME Section XII specifically Heat
Resting Chromium and Chromium-Nickel Stainless Steel Plate, Sheet
and Strip for Pressure Vessels (DOT SP-14467) and Titanium and
Titanium Alloy Strip, Sheet and Plate (DOT SP-14710) see http://phmsa.dot.gov/hazmat/permits-approvals/special-permits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Section By Section Review

    The following is a section-by-section review of the amendments
proposed in this rulemaking.

Part 107, Subpart F

    This subpart establishes a registration procedure for persons who
are engaged in the manufacture, assembly, inspection and testing,
certification, or repair of a cargo tank or a cargo tank motor vehicle
manufactured in accordance with a DOT specification under subchapter C
of this chapter or under terms of a special permit issued under this
part. In this NPRM, we are not proposing to revise this subpart, but we
are referring to it in section 173.14, where we propose to add the
terminology ``inspectors or their employer must be registered with
DOT.''

Part 171

Section 171.7
    This section lists material incorporated by reference into the HMR.
This NPRM proposes to amend Sec.  171.7, Matter incorporated by
reference, to list the 2013 edition of ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel
Code, Section XII and the 2013 edition of the National Board of Boiler
and Pressure Vessel Inspectors' National Board Inspection Code (NBIC).
Specifically, Sec.  171.7(g)(1) will be revised to include ASME Boiler
and Pressure Vessel Code, Section XII in addition to the currently
reference Section VIII, Division 1. The section references in this
paragraph will remain the same. In addition, Sec.  171.7(x)(1) and (2)
will be revised to include the 2013 edition of NBIC. The section
references in this paragraph will remain the same.

Part 173

Section 173.14
    In this NPRM we are proposing to establish new Section 173.14 for
authorization and conditions for the use of Section XII.
     This NPRM proposes to revise part 173 by adding Sec.
173.14 to set forth the authorization for the use of Section XII of
American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel
Code. Further, in proposed Sec.  173.14 we are setting forth conditions
for the use of Section XII, specifically with respect to continued
service of transport tanks, where Section XII conflicts with the NBIC.
Conditions for all tanks will be specified in paragraph (a)(1) and
include: The 2013 edition of the National Board Inspection Code (NBIC)
must be used for the design, construction, and certification
qualification and maintenance of cargo tank motor vehicles, cryogenic
portable tanks and multi-unit tank car tanks (ton tanks)
     ASME Section XII includes use of ASME Sections II
Materials, Section V Nondestructive Examination, Section VIII, Division
1 for Parts only, Section VIII, Division 2 for fatigue analysis only,
Section IX Welding and Brazing, and the NBIC Parts 1, 2 and 3,
including Supplement 6 of Parts 2 and 3;
     Nameplate character markings must be a minimum 4 mm (5/
32''), markings directly on the tank must be a minimum 8 mm (5/16'');
     Periodic test information must not be allowed on the ASME
nameplate. Marking must be in accordance with the NBIC Part 2 or Part
3, Supplement 6;
     Inspection personnel must have qualifications as required
by ASME Section XII, Article TG-4, and be qualified as evident by
having a current NBIC commission with endorsement for the level/type of
inspection to be performed or certification from their employer when
applicable;
     Inspectors or their employer must be registered with DOT.
     Repairs must be performed by a facility holding a current
NBIC certificate of authorization for the use of the National Board
``TR'' Stamp.
    Conditions and requirements for cargo tanks will be specified in
paragraph (a)(2) and must conform to all applicable requirements of
part 173; and must meet ASME Section XII Modal Appendix 1, the
appropriate Article for the category of cargo tank, all Mandatory
Appendices and Non Mandatory Appendices A thru E and G thru H, except
as follows:
     Repairs must be performed by a DOT-registered facility
holding a current NBIC certificate of authorization for the use of the
National Board ``TR'' Stamp.
     For Category 338 Cargo Tanks, ASME Section XII, Modal
Appendix 1, Article 4, paragraph 1-4.4(g)(6) does not apply. A minimum
jacketed thickness of 2.4 mm (0.0946 in) 12 gauge in the reference
steel is permitted (IBR see Sec.  171.7).
    Conditions and requirements for cryogenic portable tanks will be
set forth in paragraph (a)(3) and must conform to all applicable
requirements of this Part; and must meet ASME Section XII Modal
Appendix 3, Article 1, all Mandatory Appendices and Non Mandatory
Appendices A thru E and G thru H, except as follows:
     External and internal visual inspection in accordance with
NBIC Part 2 Supplement 6 are required in addition to ASME Section XII,
Modal Appendix 3, Article 1, paragraph 3-1.10(b), and Article 1, 3-
1.10(b)(5) (IBR see Sec.  171.7);
     ASME Section XII, Modal Appendix 3, Article 1, paragraph
3-1.10(b)(6) does not apply. Periodic test information must not be
allowed on the ASME nameplate. Marking must be in accordance with the
NBIC Part 2 or Part 3, Supplement 6 as applicable. (IBR see Sec.
171.7);
     ASME Section XII, Modal Appendix 3, Article 1, paragraph
3-1.10(d) must require inspection personnel to have qualifications as
required by ASME Section XII, Article TG-4, as evident by having a
current NBIC commission with endorsement for the level/type of
inspection to be performed or certification from their employer when
applicable. (IBR see Sec.  171.7); and
     ASME Section XII, Modal Appendix 3, Article 1, paragraph
3-1.10 must require Repairs to be performed by a facility holding a
current NBIC certificate of authorization for the use of the National
Board ``TR'' Stamp. Records must be in accordance with the NBIC Part 2
or Part 3, Supplement 6 as applicable.(IBR see Sec.  171.7).
    Conditions and requirements for ton tanks will be set forth in
paragraph (a)(4). Ton tanks must conform to all applicable requirements
of part 173 and must meet Modal Appendix 4, Article 1, all Mandatory
Appendices and Non Mandatory Appendices A thru E and G thru H except as
follows:
     ASME Section XII, Modal Appendix 4, Article 1, paragraph
3-1.10 Manufacturer-certified fusible plugs, tested and qualified under
the fuse plug manufacturers' written Quality Control system are
required. (IBR see Sec.  171.7);
     ASME Section XII, Modal Appendix 4, Article 1, paragraph
4-8 must allow non-ASME marked fusible plugs.;
     ASME Section XII, Modal Appendix 4, Article 1, paragraph
4-12(a) must require external and internal visual inspection in
accordance with NBIC Part 2 Supplement 6, S6.15. (IBR see Sec.  171.7);
     ASME Section XII, Modal Appendix 4, Article 1, paragraph
4-12(a)) does not apply. Periodic test information must not be allowed
on the ASME nameplate. Marking must be in accordance with the NBIC Part
2 or Part 3, Supplement 6 as applicable.(IBR see Sec.  171.7);
     ASME Section XII, Modal Appendix 4, Article 1, paragraph
4-12(e) must require records to be in accordance with the NBIC Part 2
or Part 3, Supplement 6 (IBR see Sec.  171.7);

     Inspection personnel must have qualifications as required
by ASME Section XII, Article TG-4, as evident by holding a current NBIC
commission with endorsement for the level/type of inspection to be
performed or certification from their employer when applicable;
     A ton tank that fails a prescribed test or inspection must
be repaired as specified in the 2013 NBIC or removed from service;
     Repairs must be performed by a facility holding a current
NBIC certificate of authorization for the use of the National Board
``TR'' Stamp.

Part 178

Section 178.200
    In this NPRM we are proposing to establish a new Sec.  178.200 for
the authorization for the use of Section XII and the NBIC for cryogenic
portable tanks.
Section 178.300
    In this NPRM, we are proposing to establish a new Sec.  178.300 for
the authorization for the use of Section XII and the NBIC for cargo
tank motor vehicles.

Part 179

Section 179.300
    In this NPRM, we are proposing to revise Sec.  179.300 to establish
paragraphs (a) and (b). Paragraph (a) would continue to require that
multi-unit tank car tanks must meet the requirements set forth in the
HMR and paragraph (b) would provide a new authorization for multi-unit
tank car tanks to be designed, constructed and certified in accordance
with Section XII with the conditions and limitations set forth in Sec.
173.14.

Part 180

Section 180.402
    In this NPRM, we are proposing to add a new Sec.  180.402 for
authorization for the use of the 2013 Edition of the NBIC with Section
VIII, Division 1 for the qualification and maintenance of cargo tanks.
Section 180.502
    In this NPRM, we are proposing to add a new Sec.  180.502 for
authorization for the use of the 2013 Edition of the NBIC with Section
VIII, Division 1 for the qualification and maintenance of tank cars.
Section 180.602
    In this NPRM, we are proposing to add a new Sec.  180.602 for
authorization for the use of the 2013 Edition of the NBIC with Section
VIII, Division 1 for the qualification and maintenance of cryogenic
portable tanks.

IX. Regulatory Analyses and Notices

A. Statutory/Legal Authority for This Rulemaking

    This NPRM is published under the authority of the Federal Hazardous
Materials Transportation Law, 49 U.S.C. 5101 et seq. Section 5103(b)
authorizes the Secretary to prescribe regulations for the safe
transportation, including security, of hazardous material in
intrastate, interstate, and foreign commerce. This NPRM provides an
alternative to the current process for the design, fabrication,
maintenance and continued service of CTMVs, cryogenic portable tanks
and ton tanks, without compromising safety.
    The Administrative Procedure Act (APA) requires Federal agencies to
give interested persons the right to petition an agency to issue,
amend, or repeal a rule (5 U.S.C. 553(e)). 49 CFR 106.95, provides the
process and procedures for persons to petition PHMSA to add, amend, or
delete a regulation. In this NPRM, PHMSA is addressing this statutory
requirement by considering petitions for rulemaking from ASME, the
National Board, and PVMA.

B. Executive Order 13610, Executive Order 13563, Executive Order 12866,
and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures

    This NPRM is not considered a significant regulatory action under
section 3(f) Executive Order 12866 and, therefore, was not reviewed by
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The proposed rule is not
considered a significant rule under the Regulatory Policies and
Procedures order issued by the U.S. 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 Regulatory Planning and
Review of September 30, 1993. Executive Order 13563, issued January 18,
2011, notes that our nation's current regulatory system must not only
protect public health, welfare, safety, and our environment but also
promote economic growth, innovation, competitiveness, and job
creation.\23\ Further, this executive order urges government agencies
to consider regulatory approaches that reduce burdens and maintain
flexibility and freedom of choice for the public. In addition, federal
agencies are asked to periodically review existing significant
regulations, retrospectively analyze rules that may be outmoded,
ineffective, insufficient, or excessively burdensome, and modify,
streamline, expand, or repeal regulatory requirements in accordance
with what has been learned.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/01/18/improving-regulation-and-regulatory-review-executive-order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Executive Order 13610, issued May 10, 2012, urges agencies to
conduct retrospective analyses of existing rules to examine whether
they remain justified and whether they should be modified or
streamlined in light of changed circumstances, including the rise of
new technologies.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ See http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2012-05-14/pdf/2012-11798.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    By building off of each other, these three Executive Orders require
agencies to regulate in the ``most cost-effective manner,'' to make a
``reasoned determination that the benefits of the intended regulation
justify its costs,'' and to develop regulations that ``impose the least
burden on society.''
    PHMSA believes that if Section XII and the 2013 edition of the NBIC
are incorporated as alternatives to Section VIII, Division 1 and the
HMR, tank manufacturers would be given more flexibility in their choice
of material and design, allowing carriers of bulk liquid hazardous
materials to purchase lighter-weight, higher-capacity tanks capable of
transporting more material per shipment. Tanks built to the design and
construction requirements in Section XII have been tested by ASME to
ensure that they withstand conditions and stresses unique to
transportation, such as rollovers, bottom damage, or piping damage. The
flexibility in selection of ASME standards will facilitate
international competitiveness for the transport of hazardous materials
and eliminate barriers to U.S. manufacturers transporting goods
internationally that are created by the rigid material construction
requirements in Section VIII, Division 1 and the HMR. Further, the ASME
standards have been deemed equivalent by PHMSA technical staff and have
been proven to provide, through special permits, an equivalent level of
safety to that of tanks constructed and designed according to the
specifications currently provided in the HMR.
    As PHMSA is not proposing to require manufacturers to use Section
XII and the 2013 edition of the NBIC, and to do so is completely
voluntary, PHMSA is not imposing any additional costs. A manufacturer
will not use Section XII to build a tank unless it believes it is net
beneficial to do so. Since Section XII

would allow manufacturers the flexibility to purchase the raw material
that is least expensive at the time, this may reduce the cost to the
manufacturer, who can then pass on that discount to the buyer of the
tank. We know that any rational manufacturer will not avail itself to
this option unless it makes business sense.
    While we don't believe that this rule imposes any new costs, we
request comments, including specific data if possible, concerning the
costs and benefits that may be associated with revisions to the HMR
based on the issues presented in this notice.

C. Executive Order 13132

    This proposed rule has been analyzed in accordance with the
principles and criteria contained in Executive Order 13132
(``Federalism''), and the President's memorandum on ``Preemption''
published in the Federal Register on May 22, 2009 (74 FR 24693). This
proposed rule will preempt State, local, and Indian tribe requirements
but does not propose any regulation that has substantial direct effects
on the States, the relationship between the national government and the
States, or the distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government. Therefore, the consultation and funding
requirements of Executive Order 13132 do not apply.
    The Federal hazardous materials transportation law, 49 U.S.C. 5101-
5128, contains an express preemption provision (49 U.S.C. 5125(b)) that
preempts State, local, and Indian tribe requirements on the following
subjects:
    (1) The designation, description, and classification of hazardous
materials;
    (2) The packing, repacking, handling, labeling, marking, and
placarding of hazardous materials;
    (3) The preparation, execution, and use of shipping documents
related to hazardous materials and requirements related to the number,
contents, and placement of those documents;
    (4) The written notification, recording, and reporting of the
unintentional release in transportation of hazardous material; and
    (5) The design, manufacture, fabrication, marking, maintenance,
recondition, repair, or testing of a packaging or container
represented, marked, certified, or sold as qualified for use in
transporting hazardous material.
    This proposed rule addresses packaging for hazardous materials,
covered in number 2 above. If adopted as final, this rule will preempt
any State, local, or Indian tribe requirements concerning packaging for
hazardous materials unless the non-Federal requirements are
``substantively the same'' as the Federal requirements. Furthermore,
this proposed rule is necessary to update, clarify, and provide relief
from regulatory requirements.
    Incorporation of new consensus standards by reference in the HMR
may impact state and local CTMV enforcement programs. Potential impacts
include the cost of purchasing the new Section XII consensus standards
and training employees in the use of this consensus standard. However,
PHMSA notes that currently many of state enforcement personnel are not
equipped with Section VIII, Division 1 and must use outside sources to
reference this standard. It is our understanding that during roadside
inspections, state officials are most often concerned with identifying
that the ASME mark is intended for the packaging on which it is
stamped. This would not require state governments to purchase copies of
Section XII for every state trooper. Rather, the most in-depth
inspection performed on a tank is handled by an independent third-party
inspector, typically a National Board Commission Inspector from an
insurance company. This would also apply to the repair of the ASME
packaging using the NBIC, which also requires a marking. Furthermore,
as engineers at PHMSA were instrumental in developing Section XII and
the 2013 edition of the NBIC, they understand them and are available to
help interpret the standards. As with other highly technical or
scientific standards that we incorporate in the HMR, PHMSA's Hazardous
Materials Information Center staff will have access to the engineers
who helped develop the standards. We invite state and local governments
with an interest in this rulemaking to comment on any effect that
revisions to the HMR to address the issues outlined in this proposed
rule may cause.

D. Executive Order 13175

    E.O. 13175 requires agencies to assure meaningful and timely input
from Indian tribal government representatives in the development of
rules that ``significantly or uniquely affect'' Indian communities and
that impose ``substantial and direct compliance costs'' on such
communities. PHMSA is not aware of any significant or unique effects or
substantial direct compliance costs on the communities of the Indian
tribal governments. Therefore, we conclude that the funding and
consultation requirements of Executive Order 13175 do not apply. We
invite Indian tribal governments to provide comments if they believe
there will be an impact.

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

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires an
agency to review regulations to assess their impact on small entities
unless the agency determines that a rule is not expected to have a
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. This
notice has been developed in accordance with Executive Order 13272
(``Proper Consideration of Small Entities in Agency Rulemaking'') and
DOT's procedures and policies to promote compliance with the Regulatory
Flexibility Act to ensure that potential impacts of draft rules on
small entities are properly considered.
    The adoption of Section XII should not have any impact on small
businesses, given that the standard is optional. After reviewing the
safety records of both current tanks and new models of tanks
constructed under special permit, PHMSA analysts found no disparities
between the safety records.
    We estimate that there are 5,166 businesses likely to be affected
by this rule. The Small Business Administration (SBA) uses industry-
specific standards to estimate which of those are ``small businesses'',
which could be based on employment or revenue. PHMSA assumes that a
significant number of businesses within the regulatory scope (nearly
all) are small.
    Based on our analysis, the three major industries--manufacturers,
third party inspection agencies, and tank repair services--could, at
their discretion--conform to the new standards. Manufacturers could
introduce new materials. Third party inspectors would conduct tests
under more current, meaningful testing relevant to more modern designs.
Tank repair services could expand to accommodate the new standards.
    Given the expected service life of about 30 years, we assume that
only 1/30 of all tanks will be replaced each year. Given the optional
nature of the rule, the new tanks will consist of some newer Section
XII tanks and some Section VIII tanks. Any manufacturer would build
tanks according to the needs of the customer, including price. At the
same time, the small number of Section XII tanks entering the market
each year will allow repairers and inspectors to transition their
workforce smoothly.

    Based upon the above estimates and assumptions, PHMSA certifies
that the proposals in this NPRM will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. In this notice, PHMSA
is soliciting comments on the preliminary conclusion that the proposals
in this NPRM will not cause a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.

F. Paperwork Reduction Act

    Section 1320.8(d), Title 5, Code of Federal Regulations requires
that PHMSA provide interested members of the public and affected
agencies an opportunity to comment on information collection and
recordkeeping requests. The recordkeeping requirements in Section XII
and the 2013 edition of the NBIC are analogous; the recordkeeping costs
of complying with Section XII and the 2013 edition of the NBIC are not
significantly different than those currently required under the current
regulatory scheme.

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 can be used to cross-reference this action with the
Unified Agenda.

H. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    This final rule does not impose unfunded mandates under the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995. It does not result in costs of
$141,300,000 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.

I. Environmental Assessment

    The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended
(42 U.S.C. 4321-4347), and implementing regulations by the Council on
Environmental Quality (40 CFR part 1500) require Federal agencies to
consider the consequences of 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 order
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 (see 40 CFR 1508.9(b)).
Description of Action
    PHMSA is considering the following alternatives: Alternative 1 is
to take no action; Alternative 2 is to incorporate ASME Section XII and
NBIC 2013 by reference and remove Section VIII; Alternative 3 is to
allow tank manufacture and use of Section XII as an alternative to
Section VIII. Use of the 2013 NBIC for continued service under Section
VIII is optional, while use of the 2013 NBIC with Section XII is
required; and Alternative 4 is to withdraw the rulemaking action and
allow use of the standards through Special Permit. Each alternative
presented below represents different levels of adoption of the new
Section XII code, from Alternative 1 (0%) to Alternative 2 (100%).
Alternatives 3 and 4 may result in a proportion between and including
these extremes--i.e., Alternative 3 may result in all or no
manufacturers choosing to use the Section XII specifications.
Similarly, reliance on the special permit process could result in all
or none of the manufacturers requesting a special permit. At this
point, it is difficult to find a basis to project future, based on
market activity. However, PHMSA believes that the adoption of the new
standard would yield substantial savings to both the manufacturer and
the user of the tanks.
    Alternative 1: No action. This is not the preferred alternative.
This would continue the incorporation by reference of Section VIII,
Division 1 for design and construction of cryogenic portable tanks and
CTMVs (The reference to NBIC 1992 for the continued use would also
remain unchanged). Though Section VIII, Division 1 sets forth detailed
criteria for the design, construction, certification, and marking of
stationary boilers and pressure vessels, it does not address unique
conditions and stresses encountered by tanks in the transportation
environment. The HMR addresses this deficiency by adding requirements
to account for conditions and stresses likely to occur in
transportation. This alternative would not impose any costs, but it
would prevent the opportunity to realize any efficiency benefits.
    Alternative 2: Incorporate ASME Section XII and NBIC 2013 by
reference and remove Section VIII, Division 1. This is not the
preferred alternative. It would promote more current design standards,
by ridding the HMR of outdated information and incorporating standards
that address modern manufacturing and welding methods. Efficiency
improvements would provide manufacturers more flexibility in design,
and allow for lighter-weight tanks that would use less fuel to
transport, with larger capacities. Section XII would also provide for
more uniform enforcement over time. However, it may preclude a normal
market-based transition from one standard to another and force
manufacturers to incur investments and staffing changes to comply with
new standards. Many commenters expressed concern that they would be
unduly burdened either immediately or in the future by ASME standards
that they have no recourse to appeal. The costs would be the purchase
of Section XII; the minimal facility transition costs discussed above;
and the initial training that may occur before the usual three-year
cycle.
    Alternative 3: Allow tank manufacture and use under Section XII as
an alternative to Section VIII, Division 1 and the applicable NBIC for
continued use. This option is the preferred alternative, because it
would provide regulatory flexibility, without imposing burdensome
costs. It would also leave the manufacturers and buyers to negotiate
which design best meets their needs, in terms of cost, resilience, and
operations. Lastly, it would authorize the use of the 2013 edition of
the NBIC as it applies to existing tanks and would require its use for
those tanks built to Section XII specifications. It may, however,
create inefficiencies among in-house, third-party and state inspectors,
because inspectors would have to be trained to two distinct standards.
This alternative would provide regulatory flexibility, without
diminishing safety from current levels. It would also leave the
manufacturers and buyers to negotiate which design best meets their
needs, in terms of cost, resilience, and operations.
    Alternative 4: Withdraw the Rulemaking Action and Allow Use of
Standards through Special Permit. This is not the preferred
alternative. This option would grant permission to produce, use, and
maintain tanks manufactured to Section XII through a special permit.
This would allow PHMSA to promote technological advancement while
maintaining the ability to closely monitor performance. PHMSA has
already issued one competent authority approval and one special permit
related to Section XII. This option would require positive action by
manufacturers to apply for a special permit and meet PHMSA's standards
for fitness. While this may be a more cautious approach, each special

permit application, including technical drawings and costs associated
with party-to applications, such as proof of fitness, would be incurred
under this option. PHMSA estimates that the typical special permit
application costs $45 to the applicant and $3,000 for PHMSA to
evaluate. A full analysis of the advantages and disadvantages and the
cost and benefits associated with each alternative can be found in the
regulatory evaluation in the docket for this rulemaking.
    PHMSA is proposing Alternative 3, as it was found to be the most
optimal. Benefits associated with the rule include lower manufacturing
costs and higher capacities for shippers. Costs to industry are minimal
and incurred only when the manufacturer decides to fabricate tanks to
the Section XII standards.
Environmental Consequences
    When developing potential regulatory requirements, PHMSA evaluates
those requirements to consider the environmental impact of each
amendment. Specifically, PHMSA evaluates the: risk of release and
resulting environmental impact; risk to human safety, including any
risk to first responders; longevity of the packaging; and if the
proposed regulation would be carried out in a defined geographic area,
the resources, especially any sensitive areas, and how they could be
impacted by any proposed regulations.
    Of the regulatory changes proposed in this rulemaking, the non-
editorial amendments are discussed in further detail and evaluated
based on their overall environmental impact as follows.

Environmental benefits result from the fact that fewer CTMVs, ton tanks
and cryogenic tanks will be required to transport the same quantities
of hazardous materials. In most cases, due to substitution of material
of construction, the thickness of the tanks would be reduced,
permitting more material to be hauled, and reducing the number of tanks
needed to handle the same volume of product.\25\ As supported by the
studies referenced in Table 11 of Section VII and based on the analysis
of both versions of the ASME codes, PHMSA's Engineering and Research
Division asserts that despite the reduction in the design margin
between Section VIII and Section XII, the standards provide an
equivalent level of safety. As the proposed alternatives would provide
the same level of safety as the currently authorized tanks, the risk of
incidents is reduced proportionately to the reduction of the number of
tanks in commerce.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ For example, a MC 331 propane tank manufactured according
to the Section XII would have a 12.5% reduction in wall thickness
when compared to Section VIII, Division 1. This reduction would lead
to at least a 2% increase in product capacity while maintaining the
current level of safety.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Add a new section to part 173 that will provide
authorization and conditions for the use of 2013 edition of the NBIC in
conjunction with Section VIII, Division 1 as an alternative. The levels
of inspectors set forth in the 2013 edition of the NBIC provide the
same level of oversight as those set forth in the currently
incorporated 1992 edition of the NBIC combined with the specifications
set forth in the HMR. For that reason, PHMSA anticipates that use of
the 2013 edition of the NBIC compared to use of the 1992 edition and
the HMR will not result in any significant impact to the human
environment.
Federal Agencies Consulted
    In an effort to ensure all appropriate federal stakeholders are
provided a chance to provide input on potential rulemaking actions,
PHMSA as part of its rulemaking development consults other federal
agencies that could be potentially affected. In developing this
rulemaking action PHMSA consulted the Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration (FMCSA), Federal Railroad Administration (FRA),
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and Occupational Safety and
Health Administration (OSHA).
Conclusion
    This NPRM proposes to incorporate by reference Section XII and the
NBIC as alternatives to Section VIII, Division 1 and the HMR. As
discussed above PHMSA believes standards provide an equivalent level of
safety and the proposals in this NPRM are environmentally neutral. In
fact, dependent on the level of usage of Section XII and subsequent
reduction of the number of tanks needed to handle the same volume of
product this rule may prove environmentally beneficial over time.
However, PHMSA welcomes any data, information, or comments related to
environmental impacts that may result from the proposal discussed in
this notice.

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 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages 19477-78) or you may visit
http://www.dot.gov/privacy.

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. For purposes of these requirements, Federal agencies
may participate in the establishment of international standards, so
long as the standards have a legitimate domestic objective, such as
providing for safety, and do not operate to exclude imports that meet
this objective. The statute also requires consideration of
international standards and, where appropriate, that they be the basis
for U.S. standards. PHMSA participates in the establishment of
international standards in order to protect the safety of the American
public, and we would assess the effects of any rule to ensure that it
does not exclude imports that meet this objective. Section XII is
written using terminology compatible with international standards such
as UN standards and IMDG. Its intent is to be useable internationally;
and several foreign manufacturers already possess the T-symbol stamp
certifying their capability to manufacture vessels using the new code.
Accordingly, incorporating Section XII and the NBIC as alternatives to
Section VIII, Division 1 and the HMR would be consistent with PHMSA's
obligations under the Trade Agreement Act, as amended.

List of Subjects

49 CFR Part 171

    Applicability, General Requirements, North American shipments,
Exports, Hazardous materials transportation, Imports, Incorporated by
reference, Definitions.

49 CFR Part 173

    Hazardous materials transportation, Packaging and containers,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

49 CFR Part 180

    Qualification and maintenance of cargo tanks, tank cars and
portable tanks.
    In consideration of the foregoing, 49 CFR chapter I is amended as
follows:

PART 171--GENERAL INFORMATION, REGULATIONS, AND DEFINITIONS

0
1. The authority citation for part 171 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 5101-5128, 44701; Pub. L. 101-410 section
4 (28 U.S.C. 2461 note); Pub. L. 104-134, section 31001; 49 CFR 1.81
and 1.97.

Subpart A--Applicability, General Requirements, and North American
Shipments

0
2. In Sec.  171.7, paragraphs (g)(1), (x)(1), and (x)(2) are revised to
read as follows:

Sec.  171.7  Reference material.

* * * * *
    (g) * * *
    (1) `ASME Code'; ASME Code, Sections II (Parts A and B), V, VIII
(Division 1), and IX of 1998 Edition of American Society of Mechanical
Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, into Sec. Sec.  172.102;
173.5b; 173.24b; 173.32; 173.306; 173.315; 173.318; 173.420; 178.255-1;
178.255-2; 178.255-14; 178.255-15; 178.272-1; 178.273; 178.274;
178.276; 178.277; 178.320; 178.337-1; 178.337-2; 178.337-3; 178.337-4;
178.337-6; 178.337-16; 178.337-18; 178.338-1; 178.338-2; 178.338-3;
178.338-4; 178.338-5; 178.338-6; 178.338-13; 178.338-16; 178.338-18;
178.338-19; 178.345-1; 178.345-2; 178.345-3; 178.345-4; 178.345-7;
178.345-14; 178.345-15; 178.346-1; 178.347-1; 178.348-1; 179.400-3;
180.407 and Section XII of the 2013 Edition of American Society of
Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code into Sec.  173.14,
Sec.  178.200, Sec.  178.300, Sec.  179.301(b).
* * * * *
    (x) * * *
    (1) NB-23, National Board Inspection Code, A Manual for Boiler and
Pressure Vessel Inspectors, 1992 Edition, into Sec.  180.413.
    (2) National Board Inspection Code, A Manual for Boiler and
Pressure Vessel Inspectors, 2013 Edition, into Sec.  180.402; Sec.
180.602, and Sec.  180.502.
* * * * *

PART 173--SHIPPERS--GENERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR SHIPMENTS AND
PACKAGINGS

0
3. The authority citation for part 173 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 5101-5128, 44701; 49 CFR 1.81, 1.96 and
1.97.

0
4. Add Sec.  173.14 to subpart A to read as follows:

Sec.  173.14  Authorization and conditions for the use of Section XII
of American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel
Code.

    (a) This section authorizes, with certain conditions and
limitations, the use of Section XII of American Society of Mechanical
Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (ASME Code Section XII) (IBR
see Sec.  171.7) as an alternative to ASME Code Section VIII, Division
1 (IBR, see Sec.  171.7).
    (b) Limitations on the use of the ASME Code Section XII for cargo
tank motor vehicles, cryogenic portable tanks, and multi-unit tank car
tanks (ton tanks) designed, constructed, and certified qualified and
maintained in accordance with ASME Code Section XII authorized in
paragraph (a) of this section--
    (1) Conditions and requirements for all tanks. (i) The 2013 edition
of the National Board Inspection Code (NBIC) (IBR, see Sec.  171.7)
must be used for the design, construction, and certification
qualification and maintenance of cargo tank motor vehicles, cryogenic
portable tanks and multi-unit tank car tanks (ton tanks).
    (ii) ASME Section XII must include use of ASME Sections II
Materials, Section V Nondestructive Examination, Section VIII, Division
1 for Parts only, Section VIII, Division 2 for fatigue analysis only,
Section IX Welding and Brazing, and the NBIC Parts 1, 2 and 3,
including Supplement 6 of Parts 2 and 3;
    (iii) Nameplate character markings must be a minimum 4 mm (5/32''),
markings directly on the tank must be a minimum 8 mm (5/16'');
    (iv) Periodic test information is not permitted on the ASME
nameplate. Marking must be in accordance with the NBIC Part 2 or Part
3, Supplement 6;
    (v) Inspection personnel must have qualifications as required by
ASME Section XII, Article TG-4, and be qualified as evident by holding
a current NBIC commission with endorsement for the level/type of
inspection to be performed or certification from their employer when
applicable;
    (vi) Inspectors or their employer must be registered with DOT;
    (vii) Repairs must be performed by a facility holding a current
NBIC certificate of authorization for the use of the National Board
``TR'' Stamp.
    (2) Conditions and requirements for cargo tanks. Cargo tanks must
conform to all applicable requirements of this Part; and must meet ASME
Section XII Modal Appendix 1, the appropriate Article for the category
of cargo tank, all Mandatory Appendices and Non Mandatory Appendices A
thru E and G thru H, except as follows:
    (i) Repairs must be performed by a DOT-registered facility holding
a current NBIC certificate of authorization for the use of the National
Board ``TR'' Stamp.
    (ii) For Category 338 Cargo Tanks, ASME Section XII, Modal Appendix
1, Article 4, paragraph 1-4.4(g)(6) does not apply. A minimum jacketed
thickness of 2.4 mm (0.0946 in) 12 gauge in the reference metal is
permitted (IBR see Sec.  171.7).
    (3) Conditions and requirements for cryogenic portable tanks.
Cryogenic portable tanks must conform to all applicable requirements of
this Part; and must meet ASME Section XII Modal Appendix 3, Article 1,
all Mandatory Appendices and Non Mandatory Appendices A thru E and G
thru H, except as follows:
    (i) External and internal visual inspection in accordance with NBIC
Part 2 Supplement 6 are required in addition to ASME Section XII, Modal
Appendix 3,Article 1, paragraph 3-1.10(b), and Article 1, 3-1.10(b)(5)
(IBR see Sec.  171.7);
    (ii) ASME Section XII, Modal Appendix 3, Article 1, paragraph 3-
1.10(b)(6) does not apply. Periodic test information is not permitted
on the ASME nameplate. Marking must be in accordance with the NBIC Part
2 or Part 3, Supplement 6 as applicable. (IBR see Sec.  171.7);
    (iii) ASME Section XII, Modal Appendix 3, Article 1, paragraph 3-
1.10(d) requires inspection personnel to have qualifications set forth
in ASME Section XII, Article TG-4, as evident by having a current NBIC
commission with endorsement for the level/type of inspection to be
performed or certification from their employer when applicable. (IBR
see Sec.  171.7); and
    (iv) ASME Section XII, Modal Appendix 3, Article 1, paragraph 3-
1.10 requires repairs to be performed by a facility holding a current
NBIC certificate of authorization for the use of the National Board
``TR'' Stamp. Records must be in accordance with the NBIC Part 2 or
Part 3, Supplement 6 as applicable. (IBR see Sec.  171.7).
    (4) Conditions and requirements for ton tanks. Ton tanks must
conform to all applicable requirements of this Part and must meet Modal
Appendix 4, Article 1, all Mandatory Appendices and Non Mandatory
Appendices A thru E and G thru H except as follows:
    (i) ASME Section XII, Modal Appendix 4, Article 1, paragraph 3-
1.10) Manufacturer-certified fusible plugs, tested and qualified under
the fuse plug manufacturers' written

Quality Control system are required. (IBR see Sec.  171.7);
    (ii) ASME Section XII, Modal Appendix 4, Article 1, paragraph 4-8
must allow Non ASME marked fusible plugs;
    (iii) ASME Section XII, Modal Appendix 4, Article 1, paragraph 4-
12(a) must require external and internal visual inspection in
accordance with NBIC Part 2 Supplement 6, S6.15. (IBR see Sec.  171.7);
    (iv) ASME Section XII, Modal Appendix 4, Article 1, paragraph 4-
12(a)) does not apply. Periodic test information is not allowed on the
ASME nameplate. Marking must be in accordance with the NBIC Part 2 or
Part 3, Supplement 6 as applicable (IBR see Sec.  171.7);
    (v) ASME Section XII, Modal Appendix 4, Article 1, paragraph 4-
12(e) must require records to be in accordance with the NBIC Part 2 or
Part 3, Supplement 6 (IBR see Sec.  171.7);
    (vi) Inspection personnel must have qualifications as required by
ASME Section XII, Article TG-4, as evident by having a current NBIC
commission with endorsement for the level/type of inspection to be
performed or certification from their employer when applicable;
    (vii) A ton tank that fails a prescribed test or inspection must be
repaired or removed from service;
    (viii) Repairs must be performed by a facility holding a current
NBIC certificate of authorization for the use of the National Board
``TR'' Stamp.

PART 178--SPECIFICATIONS FOR PACKAGINGS

0
5. The authority citation for part 178 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 5101-5128, 44701; 49 CFR 1.81, 1.96 and
1.97.

0
6. Add Sec.  178.200 to subpart H to read as follows:

Sec.  178.200  Authorization for the use of Section XII of American
Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code and the
National Board, National Board Inspection Code for cryogenic portable
tanks.

    As alternative to ASME Code Section VIII, Division 1 (IBR, see
Sec.  171.7) and the requirements of this subpart, UN T75 cryogenic
portable tanks may be designed, constructed and certified in accordance
with Section XII of American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and
Pressure Vessel Code (ASME Code Section XII) (IBR see Sec.  171.7),
with the conditions and limitations set forth in Sec.  173.14.
0
7. Add Sec.  178.300 to subpart J to read as follows:

Sec.  178.300  Authorization for the use of Section XII of American
Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code and the
National Board, National Board Inspection Code for cargo tank motor
vehicles.

    As alternative to ASME Code Section VIII, Division 1 (IBR, see
Sec.  171.7) and the requirements of this subpart, DOT Specification
cargo tank motor vehicles may be designed, constructed and certified in
accordance with Section XII of American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (ASME Code Section XII) (IBR see Sec.
171.7), with the conditions and limitations set forth in Sec.  173.14.

PART 179--SPECIFICATIONS FOR TANK CARS

0
7. The authority citation for part 179 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 5101-5128, 44701; 49 CFR 1.81, 1.96 and
1.97.

0
8. Revise Sec.  179.300 to read as follows:

Sec.  179.300  General specifications applicable to multi-unit tank car
tanks designed to be removed from car structure for filling and
emptying (Classes DOT-106A and 110AW).

    (a) Multi-unit tank car tanks must meet the requirements set forth
in this subpart; or
    (b) Multi-unit tank car tanks may also be designed, constructed and
certified in accordance with Section XII of American Society of
Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (ASME Code Section
XII) (IBR see Sec.  171.7), with the conditions and limitations set
forth in Sec.  173.14

PART 180--CONTINUING QUALIFICATION AND MAINTENANCE OF PACKAGINGS

0
9. The authority citation for part 180 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 5101-5128, 44701; 49 CFR 1.81, 1.96 and
1.97.

0
10. Add Sec.  180.402 to subpart E to read as follows:

Sec.  180.402  Authorization for the use of the 2013 Edition of the
National Board, National Board Inspection Code with Section VIII,
Division 1 of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and
Pressure Vessel Code.

    This section authorizes, with certain conditions and limitations
set forth in Sec.  173.14, the use of the 2013 edition of the National
Board Inspection Code (NBIC) (IBR, see Sec.  171.7) for the maintenance
of cargo tanks constructed to Section VIII, Division 1 of the 1998
Edition of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and
Pressure Vessel Code. DOT Specification cargo tanks constructed to the
1998 Edition of the ASME Code Section VIII, Division 1 that bear a U
Stamp may be examined, inspected, and tested under Part 180 Subpart E
and the NBIC Parts 1, 2, and 3, excluding Supplement 6 of Parts 2 and
3. The 2013 edition of the National Board Inspection Code (NBIC) (IBR,
see Sec.  171.7) must be used for the maintenance of cargo tanks
constructed to ASME Code Section XII as set forth in Sec.  178.300.
0
11. Add Sec.  180.502 to subpart F to read as follows:

Sec.  180.502  Authorization for the use of the 2013 Edition of the
National Board, National Board Inspection Code with Section VIII,
Division 1 of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and
Pressure Vessel Code.

    This section authorizes, with certain conditions and limitations
set forth in Sec.  173.14, the use of the 2013 edition of the National
Board Inspection Code (NBIC) (IBR, see Sec.  171.7) for the maintenance
of ton tanks constructed to Section VIII, Division 1 of the 1998
Edition of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and
Pressure Vessel Code. The 2013 edition of the National Board Inspection
Code (NBIC) (IBR, see Sec.  171.7) must be used for the maintenance of
ton tanks constructed to ASME Code Section XII as set forth in Sec.
178.200.
0
12. Add Sec.  180.602 to subpart G to read as follows:

Sec.  180.602  Authorization for the use of the 2013 Edition of the
National Board, National Board Inspection Code with Section VIII,
Division 1 of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and
Pressure Vessel Code.

    This section authorizes, with certain conditions and limitations
set forth in Sec.  173.14, the use of the 2013 edition of the National
Board Inspection Code (NBIC) (IBR, see Sec.  171.7) for the maintenance
of cryogenic portable tanks constructed to Section VIII, Division 1 of
the 1998 Edition of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler
and Pressure Vessel Code. Portable tanks designed, fabricated,
examined, inspected, and tested to Section VIII, Division 1 of the ASME
Code may be used with the NBIC Parts 1, 2 and 3, excluding Supplement 6
of Parts 2 and 3. The 2013 edition of the National Board Inspection
Code (NBIC) (IBR, see Sec.  171.7) must be used for the maintenance of
cryogenic portable tanks constructed to ASME Code Section XII as set
forth in Sec.  178.200.
* * * * *

    Issued in Washington, DC, under authority delegated in 49 CFR
part 1.97(b).
Magdy El-Sibaie,
Associate Administrator for Hazardous Materials Safety, Pipeline and
Hazardous Materials Safety Administration.
[FR Doc. 2013-31046 Filed 12-27-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-60-P