# Hazardous Materials: Incorporating Rail Special Permits Into the Hazardous Materials Regulations

- **operation:** document
- **citation:** 76 FR 51324
- **title:** Hazardous Materials: Incorporating Rail Special Permits Into the Hazardous Materials Regulations
- **source type:** rulemaking
- **agency:** Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
- **status:** proposed
- **official:** true
- **published on:** 2011-08-18
- **effective on:** Not available
- **summary:** The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration is proposing to amend the Hazardous Materials Regulations to incorporate provisions contained in certain widely used or longstanding special permits that have general applicability and established safety records. Special permits allow a company or individual to package or ship a hazardous material in a manner that varies from the regulations provided that an equivalent level of safety is maintained. The revisions in this proposed rule are intended to provide wider access to the regulatory flexibility offered in special permits and eliminate the need for numerous renewal requests, thus reducing paperwork burdens and facilitating commerce while maintaining an appropriate level of safety. This rulemaking also proposes to respond to two petitions for rulemaking, P-1497 concerning the use of electronic shipping papers, and P-1567 concerning the removal of the Association of American Railroad's (AAR's) AAR-600 portable tank program for previously adopted standards that meet or exceed the AAR-600 requirements.
- **machine formats:** - **json:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/federal-register-2011-20863.json
- **markdown:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/federal-register-2011-20863.md
- **app url:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/federal-register-2011-20863
- **source url:** https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2011/08/18/2011-20863/hazardous-materials-incorporating-rail-special-permits-into-the-hazardous-materials-regulations
**body:**

Federal Register, Volume 76 Issue 160 (Thursday, August 18, 2011) [Federal Register Volume 76, Number 160 (Thursday, August 18, 2011)] [Proposed Rules] [Pages 51324-51342] From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [ www.gpo.gov ] [FR Doc No: 2011-20863] ======================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration 49 CFR Parts 171, 172, 173, 174, 179, and 180 [Docket No. PHMSA-2010-0018 (HM-216B)] RIN 2137-AE55 Hazardous Materials: Incorporating Rail Special Permits Into the Hazardous Materials Regulations AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), DOT. ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration is proposing to amend the Hazardous Materials Regulations to incorporate provisions contained in certain widely used or longstanding special permits that have general applicability and established safety records. Special permits allow a company or individual to package or ship a hazardous material in a manner that varies from the regulations provided that an equivalent level of safety is maintained. The revisions in this proposed rule are intended to provide wider access to the regulatory flexibility offered in special permits and eliminate the need for numerous renewal requests, thus reducing paperwork burdens and facilitating commerce while maintaining an appropriate level of safety. This rulemaking also proposes to respond to two petitions for rulemaking, P-1497 concerning the use of electronic shipping papers, and P-1567 concerning the removal of the Association of American Railroad's (AAR's) AAR-600 portable tank program for previously adopted standards that meet or exceed the AAR-600 requirements. DATES: Written comments should be submitted on or before October 17, 2011. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by the docket number (PHMSA-2010-0018 (HM-216B)) by any of the following methods: Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov . Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Fax: 1-202-493-2251. Mail: Docket Operations, U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building, Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Routing Symbol M-30, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. Hand Delivery: To Docket Operations, Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Instructions: All submissions must include the agency name and docket number for this notice at the beginning of the comment. 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 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages 19477-78). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eileen Edmonson or Steven Andrews, Standards and Rulemaking Division, Office of Hazardous Materials Safety, (202) 366-8553, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), or Karl Alexy, Office of Safety Assurance and Compliance, (202) 493-6247, Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background II. Overview of Proposed Amendments III. Regulatory Analyses and Notices I. Background Special Permits The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) is proposing to amend the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR parts 171-180) to incorporate certain requirements based on existing special permits for transportation by railroad issued by PHMSA under 49 CFR part 107, subpart B (Sec. Sec. 107.101 to 107.127). A special permit sets forth alternative requirements (variances) to the requirements in the HMR by means that achieve a safety level that at a minimum corresponds to the safety level required under the regulations and is consistent with the public interest. Congress expressly authorized DOT to issue these variances in the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act of 1975. The HMR generally are performance-oriented regulations that provide the regulated community a certain amount of flexibility in meeting safety requirements. Even so, not every transportation situation can be anticipated and built into the regulations. Innovation is a strength of our economy, and the hazardous materials community is particularly strong at developing new materials and technologies as well as innovative ways of transporting materials. Special permits enable the hazardous materials industry to quickly, effectively, and safely integrate new products and technologies into the production and transportation streams. Thus, special permits provide a mechanism for testing new technologies, promoting increased transportation efficiency and productivity, and ensuring global competitiveness. A special permit must achieve at least an equivalent level of safety to that specified in the HMR. Implementation of new technologies and operational techniques can enhance safety because the authorized operations or activities may achieve a greater level of safety than currently required under the regulations. Special permits also reduce the volume and complexity of the HMR by addressing unique or infrequent transportation situations that would be difficult to accommodate in regulations intended for use by a wide range of shippers and carriers. PHMSA conducts ongoing reviews of special permits to identify widely used and longstanding special permits having general applicability with established safety records for adoption into regulations for broader applicability. To [[Page 51325]] obtain a special permit, interested parties must prepare and submit a detailed application that PHMSA reviews extensively. If granted and its use is needed after the expiration date assigned, the person authorized to use the special permit must submit an application to continue their use of it and undergo an extensive PHMSA renewal process. Converting these special permits into regulations reduces paperwork burdens and facilitates commerce while maintaining an acceptable level of safety. Additionally, adoption of 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 hazardous materials transported, or the transport 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. Special permits involving packaging used by a large number of persons-- such as those issued to many persons with party status or issued to a manufacturer as a ``manufacture, mark, and sell''--are potentially among the most suitable types of special permits for adoption into the HMR. Such special permits have broad applicability; moreover, many of them have been in effect for a number of years and have demonstrated safety records. Further, although we make every effort to stay as true as possible to the conditions prescribed in each special permit when converting it to proposed regulatory text, PHMSA recognizes that sometimes, due to existing regulations or historical interpretations, provisions in a special permit may require revision to convert them into regulations of general applicability. In addition, when converting special permits we often have to modify the language to describe documents and procedures that are authorized under the special permit but not specifically described in it or to modify the language to comply with requirements for proposed regulatory text prescribed by this agency, the Department of Transportation, and the Federal Register. This notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) proposes to incorporate seven (7) special permits that authorize tank car transportation operations not specifically permitted under the HMR. These special permits were initially issued to members of industry associations or similar organizations. They are DOT-SP: 1. 7616 2. 9388 3. 11184 4. 12095 5. 12905 6. 14333 7. 14622 These special permits have well-established safety records and, thus, are candidates for incorporation into the HMR. A few of the special permits in this NPRM have expired for various reasons, such as from delays that occur during the renewal process, or as a result of modifications to the HMR, packagings, processes, or other technologies that eliminate the need for the special permit. PHMSA has included them in this NPRM because both PHMSA and the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) have determined these special permits also have well-established safety records and would benefit the regulated industry if incorporated into the HMR. Incorporating these special permits into the HMR would eliminate the need for over 250 current grantees to reapply for the renewal of these special permits every four years and for PHMSA to process the renewal applications. Incorporation of these special permits into the HMR also eliminates a significant paperwork burden for the recipient. Unless otherwise excepted by this agency, a copy of each special permit must be: maintained at each facility where a packaging is manufactured under a special permit, maintained at each facility where a package is offered or re-offered for transportation under a special permit, carried on board each cargo vessel or aircraft, and, in some cases, carried on board each transport vehicle when used to transport a hazardous material under a special permit. Petitions for Rulemaking Two proposals PHMSA is addressing in this proposed rulemaking were also presented to PHMSA in petitions for rulemaking. A more detailed description of each is provided below. Petition No. P-1497 The petition from the International Vessel Operators Hazardous Materials Association, Inc. (IVOHMA) (P-1497), dated March 15, 2007, is similar to relief authorized under DOT-SP 7616 in that it requests PHMSA allow shipping paper information required under 49 CFR Part 172, Subpart C (shipping papers) to be transmitted electronically by computer through use of electronic data interchange (EDI). The IVOHMA states ``differences in hazard communication or the interpretation of their application are a principle[sic] source of disharmony in intermodal and/or international transportation of [hazardous materials].'' The IVOHMA also states ``electronic data interchange has become a recognized method of efficient and accurate communication currently being used successfully throughout the industrialized world'' that permits ``immediate access to hazard communication by all those involved in the transportation infrastructure as well as by emergency responders equipped'' with this technology. Further, the IVOHMA states in its petition that the proposals it submitted were vetted with its staff and members and determined to be opportunities for regulatory amendment to promote efficiencies in the modal interchange of these containers in both domestic and international transportation. PHMSA and the FRA met with the IVOHMA, on January 17, 2007, to discuss several issues concerning the HMR and containerized hazardous materials cargo that the association and its members believe may be presenting operational difficulties, impediments, and obstacles to efficient and safe intermodal transportation. These issues included inconsistencies between the shipping paper requirements for each mode for documents that can be construed as meeting the HMR shipping paper requirements, ``such as work orders, dock receipts or train consists,'' and determining which shipping document is considered legally in control of the shipment. The IVOHMA also identified two problems associated with the train consist. The first problem is Sec. Sec. 174.24 and 174.26 do not require that the agency or person be identified that corresponds to the emergency response information telephone number on the document. The HMR requires this information on a shipping paper document under Sec. 172.604(b). The IVOHMA states ``valuable time is often lost'' while emergency responders using these telephone numbers or inspectors checking their validity track down the correct individual and/or organization associated with a specific telephone number. The IVOHMA also states a similar problem occurs when international telephone numbers are offered as the emergency response telephone number that provides access from the United States to the emergency responder, and includes delays that occur obtaining a telephonic connection while using the international access codes. The second problem is the [[Page 51326]] emergency response telephone number needs to be accessible by all the persons associated with the transport of the shipment, such as those carriers trying to obtain information to respond to a shipboard emergency. To address these concerns, the IVOHMA submitted proposed regulatory language that would define the term ``interlining carrier'' in Sec. 171.8, establish requirements for ``interlining carrier documents'' in a new Sec. 172.206, and make several additional related revisions concerning shipping papers and emergency response information in Sec. Sec. 172.204(d), 172.604(a), and 174.26(b). Although the petition the IVOHMA submitted primarily concerned the transportation of containerized hazardous materials between railcars and vessels, the regulatory language the IVOHMA proposed would apply to interlining carriers in all modes. This rulemaking applies to rail transportation only. Therefore, PHMSA determined proposing regulations that apply to carriers in all modes would exceed the scope of this rulemaking. PHMSA considered revising the IVOHMA's proposals to limit them to rail transport only with the possibility of considering their application to other modes of transport in a future rulemaking. However, FRA determined the IVOHMA's proposals are not needed because the language in existing Sec. 174.24(a) applies to the transfer of all interlining documents. This section requires that each person accept a hazardous material for rail transportation or transport a hazardous material by rail only if that person has received a shipping paper for that material. If the material is excepted from the shipping paper requirements under the HMR, this section does not apply. PHMSA requests public comment not only on the proposals in this rulemaking, but on IVOHMA's suggestions not included in this rulemaking and on the possible effects EDI may have on distributing hazardous materials shipping paper information if its use is permitted in all modes of transport. Based on the comments received, PHMSA may consider the use of EDI in other modes of transport in a future rulemaking. Petition No. P-1567 PHMSA adopted standards for portable tanks in container-on-flat-car (COFC) or trailer-on-flat-car (TOFC) service under Sec. 174.63 and other sections of the HMR that meet or exceed the AAR-600 requirements. The petition from the Gold Tank Inspection Service, Inc. (P-1567), requests that PHMSA discontinue the AAR-600 program and amend Sec. 174.63(c) to remove the requirement that portable tanks in COFC or TOFC service comply with the standard ``AAR-600'' of the Association of American Railroad's (AAR's) Specification for Tank Cars, entitled ``Specifications for the Acceptability of Tank Containers,'' because: (1) The current HMR regulations exceed the AAR 600 requirements; (2) after January 1, 2003, all the specifications for original portable tank construction listed in the AAR 600 standard are not allowed to be built except DOT Specification 60 and International standard 1496-3 portable tanks, which are already covered under Sec. Sec. 178.255 and 178.274, respectively, of the HMR; and (3) after January 1, 2010, the AAR 600 standard will no longer be needed since, in accordance with Sec. 171.14, all portable tanks will have to meet or exceed the AAR 600 requirements and AAR 600 does not cover portable tank requirements. In a May 20, 2009 letter of clarification PHMSA issued to Robert E. Fronczak, Assistant Vice President, Environment and Hazardous Materials, Association of American Railroads, under Reference No. 09- 0125, PHMSA states ``most of the portable tanks listed in the AAR-600 standard are prohibited from new construction, although they may remain in service provided they continue to meet the applicable standard,'' and that ``we intend to propose a revision to Sec. 174.63(c) as soon as practicable.'' The changes Mr. Fronczak described have effectively made the HMR's reference to the AAR-600 standard outdated. Therefore, PHMSA proposes to revise Sec. 173.63(c) to remove its reference to the AAR 600 standard and to require that portable tanks transported in COFC or TOFC service must conform to all HMR requirements applicable to portable tanks in this type of service. II. Overview of Proposed Amendments In this NPRM, PHMSA is proposing to incorporate into the HMR provisions that: (a) Establish an alternative tank car qualification program; (b) permit the electronic transmission of shipping paper information; (c) permit straight threads in the clean out and/or inspection port openings of a DOT Specification 110A500W multi-unit tank car tank; (d) permit alternative start-to-discharge pressure requirements for certain DOT Specification 105J500W tank cars containing chlorine; (e) permit alternative pressure relief requirements for pressure relief devices for DOT Specification 105J300W tank cars containing certain flammable liquids; (f) permit certain DOT and AAR specification tank cars with stainless steel identification plates to have their specification and other required information stamped on the identification plate instead of the tank car head provided certain requirements are met; (g) permit liquefied anhydrous ammonia gas to be measured by a metering device when loaded into a tank car as an alternative to measuring the cars by weight; (h) revise Sec. 179.13(b) to require that rail tank cars with a gross weight that exceeds 263,000 but not 286,000 pounds containing poisonous-by- inhalation (PIH) materials must be approved for use by the Federal Railroad Administration's (FRA's) Associate Administrator for Railroad Safety; and (i) eliminate use of the AAR 600 program concerning the FRA's approval of bulk packagings in COFC and TOFC service that is incorporated into Sec. 174.63(c)(2). PHMSA invites comment on the potential costs and safety benefits associated with the proposals in this NPRM, including any information that may be used in a cost-benefit safety analysis. Each proposal is discussed in greater detail in the following preamble sections. A. Alternative Tank Car Qualification Program The FRA established the Alternative Tank Car Qualification Program, also known as TCQ-1, in 1998 in collaboration with the railroad industry and PHMSA under Special Permit DOT-SP 12095. The TCQ-1 program serves as a minimally acceptable framework for owners to qualify their DOT specification and non-specification tank cars and components using requirements in place of those prescribed in 49 CFR Part 180. The TCQ-1 program permits owners to develop tank car inspection requirements specific to their construction and use, provided the FRA has determined the new methods are as safe or safer than those prescribed in the HMR. FRA determined the new program is successful and its use has dramatically increased since its inception. In fact, FRA and PHMSA have determined the industry's use of the TCQ-1 program is so complete that it essentially is the only tank car inspection standard used today. Currently, 559 parties are operating under TCQ-1. PHMSA and FRA are not aware of any incidents that have occurred as a result of the issuance of special permits for the tank car qualification program. PHMSA and FRA believe incorporating Special Permit DOT-SP 12095 into the HMR will provide an equivalent level of safety for the qualification of both specification and [[Page 51327]] non-specification rail tank cars, and will reduce the administrative burden of reapplying for this special permit. Therefore, in this NPRM, PHMSA and FRA are proposing to incorporate Special Permit DOT-SP 12095 into the HMR. This proposal pertains to: marking and stamping; adding new definitions pertaining to tank cars; adding qualifications for tank car inspections and tests; revising the requirements for tank car repairs, alterations, conversions, and modifications; clarifying recordkeeping requirements; and listing hazardous and other materials corrosive to tanks or service equipment. The following table summarizes the proposed changes: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Proposed change to 49 Number Section No. CFR part 180 Proposed change from DOT-SP 12095 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1............. 180.501................. Applicability........... Existing paragraph (b) is now paragraph (c), and new paragraph (b) and (d) are added to clarify, respectively, the minimally acceptable framework each owner's tank car qualification program must have, and specifies that documents must be made available upon request to FRA or an authorized representative of the U.S. Department of Transportation. 2............. 180.503 (Definitions)... Bottom shell............ Not added. This definition already exists in Sec. 171.8. Corrosive to the tank or No change. service equipment. Defects................. Added to eliminate industry confusion. Design level of Minor edits. reliability and safety. Interior heating system. No change. Lining/Coating owner.... No change. Maintenance............. Minor edits. Modification............ Added to aid industry compliance. Objectively reasonable Added to explain the use of this term in and articulable belief. Sec. 180.509(b)(4). Qualification........... First sentence states what the term means instead of how to achieve it. Second sentence (essentially unchanged) states how to achieve qualification and emphasizes that ``qualification'' requires a representation that the process has been completed successfully. Railworthy, Explains the term. When FRA requires a Railworthiness. recall of a tank car or series of tank cars it issues a ``Railworthiness Directive.'' Reactive to the tank or Adds reactivity language based on Sec. service equipment. 173.24(b)(2) and (3). Reinforced tank shell No change. butt weld. Reinforcing plate....... No change. Reliability............. No change. Representation.......... Reworded. Safety system........... No change. Service equipment....... Minor edits. Service equipment owner. Added to clarify the party responsible and to accommodate a growing trend in the industry that the owner of the car may or may not own the service equipment. Tank car owner.......... This is a codification of previous FRA interpretations and statements. Top shell............... Not added. This definition already exists in Sec. 171.8. 3............. 180.507................. Paragraph (b)(2)........ ``Marked'' replaces ``stamped'' to allow for flexibility with regulatory compliance. Paragraph (b)(5)........ This TCQ-1 paragraph is omitted but language is used from existing Sec. 180.507(b)(5). 4............. 180.509................. Paragraph (a)(4)........ Added last sentence to ameliorate a concern from tank car owners that modifications have been made to their cars without their knowledge; minor edits. Paragraph (b)(4)........ Replaced ``probable cause'' with the wording ``objectively reasonable and articulable belief'' because the former is a term of art in criminal law and is also used in FRA drug and alcohol regulations. The intent of Sec. 180.509(b)(4) is to create a standard less strict than that of an emergency order, but rigorous enough to compel a tank car owner to reinspect and repair, if necessary, tank cars considered potential hazards irrespective of their periodic test and inspection requirements. Paragraph (c)(1)........ Minor edits. Paragraph (d)........... Minor edits. Paragraph (d)(2)........ Added last sentence for clarity. Paragraph (d)(3)........ Added ``Corrosion'' as specific element for inspection. Paragraph (d)(5)........ To insure inclusiveness, added ``all closures'' as substitute for specific item names. Paragraph (d)(6)........ Dropped ``operability'' test of excess flow valves because it is not a practical test and a successful result might damage the excess valve seat and preclude seating in a future event. Paragraph (e)(1)........ Replace ``high-stressed structural elements'' with the simpler words ``structural elements.'' [[Page 51328]] Paragraph (f)(1)........ Added the responsibility of the tank car owner for clarity. Paragraph (f)(4)........ Added a general prohibition against operating overly thin tank cars; this responsibility is changed from putting it solely on tank car owners who often have no control over the day to day movements of their tank cars. Paragraph (g)........... Minor edits; removes the language that implies only a ``qualified individual'' could find a thin tank car and invoke the restrictions in this paragraph. Paragraph (h)........... No change. Paragraph (i)........... Minor edits. Paragraph (j)........... Minor edits; Replaced the wording ``after reassembly of a tank car'' from Part 180, Subpart F, and ``installed on the tank car'' with ``installed, replaced, or reinstalled on the tank car.'' Paragraph (l)........... Minor edits. Paragraph (m)........... After 12/2010 the requirements of paragraph (m) should have been fulfilled. There may be late tank cars or tank cars with extended alternate inspection intervals; therefore, this provision will be retained for an additional 5-10 years. 5............. 180.511................. ........................ Added minor edits; included those in Part 180, Subpart F, to capture requirements for qualifying service equipment. 6............. 180.513................. Paragraph (a)........... Reworded to encompass the entire AAR Tank Car Manual rather than certain appendices. Paragraph (b)........... Added for clarification and as a reminder that tank car or component owners are responsible for verifying compliance with the owner's maintenance instructions. Paragraph (c)........... Is the same language as existing paragraph (b) from DOT-SP 12095. The last sentence was added for clarification. 7............. 180.515................. Paragraph (a)........... Added last sentence to clarify the primacy of dates marked in Appendix C of the AAR Tank Car Manual. 8............. 180.517................. ........................ Revised to clarify that marking or retaining the specification on the tank, either after initial construction in paragraph (a) or subsequent qualification in paragraph (b), is the ``representation'' of ``qualification'' defined in Sec. 180.503. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Additional provisions from Special Permit DOT-SP 12095 as proposed will be in Sec. Sec. 179.201-10, 179.220-25, and 180.501, and 180.503, 180.507, 180.509, 180.511, 180.513, 180.515, 180.517, and Appendix D of part 180. B. Telephone and Electronic Data Interchange Shipping Papers Special Permit DOT-SP 7616 permits the transmission of shipping paper information by telephone and electronic data interchange (EDI). Special Permit DOT-SP 7616 is currently used by 626 parties. Prior to this special permit, shippers entered information on shipping papers by hand, typewriter, or with the use of a computer and then transmitted these documents by hand, railroad agent, facsimile, or postal system to a train crew or rail yard. These methods were very time consuming. This shipping information would then be entered into the receiver's tracking system, a process that resulted in a large number of key entry errors for hazardous materials shipments. Starting in the 1960s, many companies began using in-house computer systems and networks to assist with preparing and tracking shipping information, but technological limitations often prevented or restricted one company's system from communicating with another's. Rail companies and shippers attempting to address these issues and find solutions formed the Transportation Data Coordination Committee (TDCC) in 1968, and started publishing standards on EDI in 1975. In the mid- 1970's, the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) issued Exemption DOT-E 7616 to permit railroad companies to ``certify'' their shipping papers for hazardous materials by permitting the shipper to leave a ``voice'' message stating that a hazardous materials shipment loaded on a railcar was being offered for transportation. Eventually, the exemption was revised to allow an ``electronic'' shipping document to be faxed and later transmitted electronically from computer to computer. Today, EDI standards are used worldwide for most industries that rely on electronic data transfer of information, such as banks, medical institutions, and shipping companies outside of railroad- related businesses. In consultation with USDOT, the TDCC evolved, and the EDI standards were published as guidelines on electronic data standards for the transportation industry. These guidelines established format codes and protocols for communicating and verifying the accuracy of electronic information, including hazardous materials information on a shipping paper, for hazardous materials shippers and carriers. Currently, the Accredited Standards ``X12'' Committee (ACS) of the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) creates standards specifically for EDI. Industry organizations take these standards and modify them to fit the types of electronic transmissions and/or transactions needed by each industry. This is what is done in the railway industry. As a result, there is no one specific standard that includes all the electronic transmissions permitted as EDI. Special Permit DOT-SP 7616 allows a carrier to accept shipping paper information via telephone (i.e., voice communications) for hazardous material shipments that have been transported by railroad, and authorizes several variations in the certification requirement when this information is transmitted telephonically or through EDI. The Federal Aviation Administration and Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration have informed PHMSA and FRA that some [[Page 51329]] inconsistencies exist when these standards are applied between the different transportation modes. Therefore, in this NPRM, PHMSA and FRA are proposing to incorporate into the HMR the provisions for EDI prescribed in Special Permit DOT-SP 7616 and requested in Petition No. P-1497 for any hazardous materials shipment transported by rail only. This will exclude, for example, the use of voice communications as an authorized method for carriers to accept hazardous materials shipping paper information for transporting these shipments by aircraft or motor vehicle. Further, PHMSA and FRA are proposing to allow a signature in the signature block of an EDI form to represent completion of the shipper's certification prescribed under Sec. 172.204. Users of EDI may wish to consult the ANSI's ACS X12 Committee for guidance on EDI transmissions and transactions for electronic shipping documents, along with any other guidance developed on this subject by the Department's agencies, such as the FRA. PHMSA and FRA are not aware of any incidents that have occurred as a result of the issuance of Special Permit DOT-SP 7616. PHMSA and FRA have also determined the overall effect of the special permit has improved the timely and accurate receipt of hazardous materials information, thereby improving safety. As mentioned earlier in this preamble, the IVOHMA also requested through a petition for rulemaking (P-1497) that PHMSA revise the HMR to include the transmission of shipping documents through EDI. PHMSA and FRA acknowledge that hazardous materials shipping document information is routinely transmitted by computer but no provision in the HMR specifically addresses this. PHMSA and FRA also note that the use of EDI to transmit this information does not eliminate the requirement for the printed copy of a shipping paper to accompany a hazardous materials shipment. PHMSA and FRA specifically request comments on the costs and safety benefits associated with these proposals, as well as the possible effects and/or modifications needed to permit EDI to transmit successfully the shipping paper information for hazardous materials in all transportation modes. The provisions for Special Permit DOT-SP 7616 and Petition No. P- 1497 are proposed in Sec. Sec. 172.201, 172.202, 172.204, and 172.604. The changes that IVOHMA proposed for Sec. 174.24 are also located in Sec. 172.202; therefore, they are not needed in Sec. 174.24 and we are not proposing to revise that section. C. Straight Threads on Multi-Unit Tank Cars Special Permit DOT-SP 14333 authorizes the manufacture, marking, sale and use of a non-DOT specification tank car conforming to all the regulations applicable to the DOT Specification 110A500W multi-unit tank car tank, except that the tank must be equipped with straight threads in the clean-out/inspection port openings instead of the National Gas Taper Threads. Four parties currently use this special permit. This special permit also permits retrofitting. Section 179.300- 13(b) requires that taper threads must be used on the valve opening. In the safety equivalency evaluation for Special Permit DOT-SP 14333, PHMSA and FRA determined that straight threads on the clean-out/ inspection port opening would provide an equivalent level of safety. Tapered threads are designed to provide a seal when torqued. The seal is a result of the compression of the male and female threads. Because they compress, there is an inevitable degree of deformation. This deformation decreases the likelihood that a proper seal can be obtained upon subsequent applications. Straight threads are used on connections where a gasket is compressed to create a seal. Therefore, a seal can be obtained by repeated application as long as the gasket has not degraded. The clean-out/inspection port openings are used repeatedly and introduce an opportunity for leaks. The straight threads on these openings help to minimize leaking. Special Permit DOT-SP 14333 limits the use of the straight threads opening to certain high-hazard Division 2.3 (poisonous gas), Division 6.1 (poisonous), and Class 8 (corrosive) hazardous materials, as well as those materials authorized to be transported in DOT Specification 110A500W multi-unit tank car tanks. However, PHMSA and FRA believe straight threads in inspection ports can be used for all hazardous materials authorized to be transported in DOT Specification 110A multi-unit tank car tanks and are proposing this action in this NPRM. PHMSA and FRA are not aware of any incidents that have occurred as a result of the issuance of this special permit, and believe these provisions, if adopted, will provide an adequate level of safety. Therefore, PHMSA and FRA are proposing to incorporate Special Permit DOT-SP 14333 into the HMR and further allowing straight threads in inspection ports to be used for all hazardous materials authorized to be transported in DOT Specification 110A multi-unit tank car tanks. The provisions for this special permit are proposed in Sec. 179.300-13(b) for DOT Specification 110A multi-unit tank cars only. D. Alternative Start-to-Discharge Pressure Requirements for Tank Cars Containing Chlorine Special Permit DOT-SP 14622 authorizes the transportation of certain DOT Specification 105J500W tank cars containing chlorine that have start-to-discharge settings that do not meet the regulatory requirements for pressure relief devices. Three parties currently use this special permit. In its original application for this special permit, Occidental Chemical Corporation (OxyChem) requested relief from Sec. 179.15(b) to allow tank cars in chlorine service to be equipped with combination pressure relief valves (PRV) with a set pressure of 360 pounds per square inch (psi) rather than the required set pressure of 356 psi. OxyChem justified its request based on its history of operating tank cars safely in a manner similar to what it was requesting. OxyChem also based its request on the HMR's regulatory history prior to the final rule issued under Docket No. HM-216, effective on October 1, 1996 (61 FR 28666; 61 FR 38642; 61 FR 50252), which permitted DOT Specification 105J500W tank cars used to transport chlorine to be equipped with a PRV with a set pressure of 356 psi. The FRA conducted an evaluation of the level of safety provided by the terms and allowances of Special Permit DOT-SP 14622. As part of this evaluation, FRA staff contacted the Chlorine Institute, which represents all of the companies that are a party to this special permit. The Chlorine Institute reported it has not received a report of any incident related to the conditions allowed under Special Permit DOT-SP 14622. In addition, the Chlorine Institute found the PRV setting does not affect the standard start-to-discharge pressure that is the basis for the flow rating pressure. The flow rating pressure, in turn, is used to calculate the required PRV flow capacity. Therefore, the FRA finds the valve is sized appropriately for the required design conditions. The FRA has one safety concern related to Special Permit DOT-SP 14622. If the relief discs or pins burst or break within their tolerances, there is the potential that the valve will be exposed to the lading and its vapor for an extended period of time. A rupture disc or breaking pin is used in conjunction with a reclosing PRV to [[Page 51330]] provide a barrier between the valve and its components from the lading and the vapor of the lading, as exposure to these can lead to corrosion and ultimately the malfunctioning of the valve. Furthermore, the FRA believes it is important that combination PRVs are equipped with ``tell-tale devices'' located outboard (outside) of the rupture disc (or breaking pin) and inboard (inside) of the valve. When the disc or breaking pin is intact, the valve indicates no pressure. If the disc or pin has been compromised, the valve will show an elevated pressure. An operator inspecting the condition of the tell-tale device can determine if the rupture disc or breaking pin has been compromised. A rupture disc has a rated pressure burst-pressure tolerance of +/- 5 percent. A breaking pin has a rated pressure burst-pressure tolerance of +/- 10 percent (see ASME Section VIII, UG-126 Pressure Relief Valves). An evaluation of the special permit relative to both the rupture disc and breaking pin is provided in the following paragraph. Special Permit DOT-SP 14622 allows for the PRV to have a set pressure of 360 psi. The 
- **truncated:** true
- **body characters:** 124254