{"operation":"document","citation":"60 FR 47723","title":"Exemption, Approval, Registration and Reporting Procedures; Miscellaneous Provisions","source_type":"rulemaking","agency":"Research and Special Programs Administration","status":"proposed","official":true,"published_on":"1995-09-14","effective_on":null,"summary":"To expedite processing of applications and to promote clarity and program consistency, RSPA is proposing to revise the procedures for applying for exemptions and to establish procedures for applying for approvals, registering (other than the hazmat registration program), and reporting. In addition, the proposed rule would amend in minor ways a number of provisions, mostly procedural. The intended effect of this NPRM is to provide guidance for persons required to obtain an approval, register, or report with RSPA. By clarifying the requirements, RSPA would reduce the need to seek additional information necessary to complete the processing of applications. The proposed changes also would reduce the processing time.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/federal-register-95-22816.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/federal-register-95-22816.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/federal-register-95-22816","source_url":"https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/1995/09/14/95-22816/exemption-approval-registration-and-reporting-procedures-miscellaneous-provisions","body":"Federal Register, Volume 60 Issue 178 (Thursday, September 14, 1995) [Federal Register Volume 60, Number 178 (Thursday, September 14, 1995)] [Proposed Rules] [Pages 47723-47734] From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [ www.gpo.gov ] [FR Doc No: 95-22816] ======================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Research and Special Programs Administration 49 CFR Parts 107, 171, 172, 173 and 178 [Docket No. HM-207C, Notice No. 95-9] RIN 2137-AC63 Exemption, Approval, Registration and Reporting Procedures; Miscellaneous Provisions AGENCY: Research and Special Programs Administration (RSPA), DOT. ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: To expedite processing of applications and to promote clarity and program consistency, RSPA is proposing to revise the procedures for applying for exemptions and to establish procedures for applying for approvals, registering (other than the hazmat registration program), and reporting. In addition, the proposed rule would amend in minor ways a number of provisions, mostly procedural. The intended effect of this NPRM is to provide guidance for persons required to obtain an approval, register, or report with RSPA. By clarifying the requirements, RSPA would reduce the need to seek additional information necessary to complete the processing of applications. The proposed changes also would reduce the processing time. DATES: Comments. Comments must be received by November 28, 1995. ADDRESSES: Comments. Address comments to Dockets Unit (DHM-30), Hazardous Materials Safety, RSPA, U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, DC 20590-0001. Comments should identify the docket and notice number and be submitted, when possible, in five copies. Persons wishing to receive confirmation of receipt of their comments should include a self-addressed, stamped postcard. The Dockets Unit is located in Room 8421 of the Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street SW, Washington DC 20590-0001. Office hours are 8:30 am to 5:00 pm Monday through Friday, except on public holidays when the office is closed. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jennifer Antonielli, Office of Hazardous Materials Standards, (800) 467-4922, or Kathleen Molinar, Office of the Chief Counsel, (202) 366-4400, RSPA, Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street SW, Washington DC 20590-0001. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background The Federal hazardous material transportation law (Federal hazmat law), 49 U.S.C. 5101-5127, directs the Secretary of Transportation to prescribe regulations for the safe transportation of hazardous material in commerce. 49 U.S.C. 5103. The Research and Special Programs Administration (RSPA) is the administration within the Department of Transportation primarily responsible for implementing the Federal hazmat law. 49 CFR 1.53. RSPA does so through the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR), 49 CFR parts 171-180. Under 49 U.S.C. 5117(a), RSPA is authorized to issue an exemption from the Federal hazmat law or the HMR if an applicant demonstrates that public safety will not be compromised. The procedures governing application for an exemption and the manner in which the application is processed are found at 49 CFR subpart B of part 107. In addition, in numerous instances the HMR require authorization by or registration with RSPA before a person may engage in particular hazmat transportation-related activities in areas such as manufacturing and certifying hazardous material packagings, offering hazardous material for transportation, and transporting hazardous material. Elsewhere, the HMR impose reporting requirements on those engaging in certain hazmat transportation activity. A significant portion of the regulated community is subject to one or more of these types of requirements. Procedures to be followed in seeking an approval from RSPA, registering with RSPA or reporting to RSPA may be found in the HMR provision establishing the particular requirement, but in many cases these procedures are absent or incomplete. There are no general procedural rules in the HMR governing these matters. This proposed rule would revise existing exemption procedures at 49 CFR subpart B of part 107 and create a new subpart H of part 107 to establish a similar procedural framework for approvals, registrations and reports. [[Page 47724]] RSPA processes numerous approval, registration and reporting matters, and practices have developed over time. Nevertheless, establishment of formal procedures through regulation provides desirable guidance to all those who now or in the future may be subject to HMR approval, registration or reporting requirements, and fosters the greatest possible consistency in RSPA's handling of these matters. The proposed procedures, in many respects, parallel those for exemptions, and this rule would modify them, and largely codify the approval, registration and reporting procedures that RSPA currently follows. Establishing procedures in 49 CFR part 107 for approvals, registration, and reports would minimize the need for RSPA to seek information from applicants in order to complete the processing of applications. The procedures for approvals, registration and reporting are limited in their application in two respects. First, under the HMR, other Federal agencies, including the United States Coast Guard, the Federal Highway Administration, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the Departments of Defense and Energy, the Bureau of Mines, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, and non-Federal entities such as the Association of American Railroads, issue approvals or receive registrations or reports under the HMR. For example, under Sec. 176.415, Coast Guard approval must be obtained before loading or unloading certain explosives onto or from vessels. The procedures established in this rulemaking would apply only with respect to those matters that, under the HMR, are handled by RSPA. Those matters for which the HMR assigns responsibility to other entities will continue to be handled according to the procedures of those entities. Second, this rule does not supersede existing procedures for approvals, registration, or reporting, such as the minimum content of the application or the RSPA office where it is to be filed. Where 49 CFR subpart H of part 107 supplements a specific HMR requirement, both will apply. In the unlikely event that subpart H conflicts with an element of the specific approval, registration, or reporting requirement, the specific requirement will govern. Comments are invited on any apparent conflicts. Proposed amendment of selected provisions in 49 CFR part 107 would clarify and, in some cases, slightly modify RSPA procedures with respect to rulemaking, preemption determinations and enforcement. Certain provisions of 49 CFR part 171 would be amended for clarity. Sections 172.302 and 173.22a would be amended to incorporate requirements currently in Appendix B to subpart B of part 107. A new Sec. 178.3(d) would permit only those persons authorized under an exemption or their agents to certify a packaging to the exemption. II. Regulatory Reinvention Initiative In a March 4, 1995 memorandum, the President directed Federal agencies to review all agency regulations and eliminate or revise those that are outdated or in need of reform. RSPA issued a notice on April 4, 1995, (Docket HM-222; 60 FR 17049) requesting comments on regulatory reform and announced seven public meetings nationwide to identify obsolete and burdensome regulations which can be eliminated from the HMR and techniques to improve its customer services. Some of the commenters responding to the notice under Docket HM-222 identified the exemption and approval procedures contained in the HMR as areas in need of clarification and reform. Today's notice is consistent with the goals of the President to clarify and revise Federal agency regulations to relieve unnecessary regulatory burdens. III. Request for Comments Comments are invited with respect to all of the proposed changes. In particular, RSPA is interested in whether commenters believe the changes would make the process of applying for an exemption or approval simpler or more efficient, and whether paperwork burdens would be eased; whether the proposed provisions are clear; and how the rule would affect small businesses and other entities. IV. Summary of Proposed Amendments A. Exemptions The exemption procedures at 49 CFR subpart B of part 107 would be reorganized to provide a framework that is more logically arranged than at present. The proposed rule sets forth application requirements for exemptions, exemption modifications, procedures for seeking party status to an exemption and renewing an exemption or a grant of party status. The proposed rule would establish three processing categories-- routine, priority, and emergency; the standards to qualify for priority or emergency processing; and the procedures and review criteria to be applied in each category. Next, the notice would set forth the powers of the Associate Administrator for Hazardous Materials Safety (Associate Administrator) to modify, suspend, or terminate an exemption or grant of party status; the standards to do so, and the procedures to be followed. Finally, this NPRM proposes procedures for reconsideration of an exemption decision by the Associate Administrator and appeal of that decision to the RSPA Administrator. Substantively, the current regulations would be revised in several respects. Summaries of the more significant proposed revisions follow. In this notice, timely filing requirements under the subpart would be clarified by standardizing the ``filing'' date as the date a submission is received at the specified RSPA office. Also, the required contents of an application would be expanded in several respects. The applicant would need to list HMR exemptions, approvals, and other authorizations previously or currently held that are related to the subject of the application and known to the applicant; this information would facilitate prompt processing of the application by expediting review of other relevant information. In addition, the applicant would be required to identify each manufacturing facility that would be operating under the requested exemption; this information would facilitate later RSPA inspections. A foreign applicant, after designating a domestic agent for service, would be required to consent in writing to personal jurisdiction with respect to all matters under the Federal hazmat law related to the exemption. The proposed rule also provides that an applicant's failure to respond to a request by RSPA for additional information within 30 days would result automatically in application denial. Paperwork burdens would be reduced by requiring only duplicate, rather than triplicate, application submissions. In the proposal, the Associate Administrator explicitly would be authorized to consider evidence of an applicant's capability and integrity in deciding on an application. A pending or completed enforcement action for HMR violations could be considered, to the extent the Associate Administrator found it to be relevant. If an enforcement action were only pending, and a final finding of violation had not been made, that would be considered in assessing the weight the enforcement action should be given in deciding on an application. The standards for routine and emergency application processing would be clarified, and a third category, that of priority processing, would be created. The rule would formalize, but not modify, the way in which exemption applications now are [[Page 47725]] routinely processed. When an application is determined to be complete, it is published in the Federal Register and public comment is solicited. The application then is considered under prescribed standards, including demonstration of an equivalent level of safety and whether the applicant has the capability and integrity necessary to operate under the exemption. Similarly, the proposed rule would not change how an emergency exemption application is processed, but would clarify and slightly modify the standards for qualifying for emergency processing. The standard would be expanded to include likelihood of significant injury to persons, rather than only loss of life. Also, the proposed rule would clarify that a likelihood of significant economic harm, standing alone, does not entitle an applicant to emergency processing; whether the prospect of significant economic loss constitutes an emergency would be a matter for the Associate Administrator's judgment. For example, the Associate Administrator may find that a carrier's loss of transportation revenue or failure to gain new revenue, or a shipper's failure immediately to gain a new market, would not justify emergency processing. Specifically, the rule would add a provision that the Associate Administrator may determine a risk of economic loss to the applicant, or to another person engaged in the hazmat activity in cooperation with the applicant, not to be the basis for a finding of emergency if the applicant or another person could have filed for routine application processing in a timely manner. If an application qualifies for emergency processing, it is not published in the Federal Register, subject to public comment, or held strictly to the submission requirements for routine processing. Further, recognizing that urgency may not permit the fullest deliberation, the standard for granting the exemption is simply whether doing so is in the public interest, in light of the standards that apply to an application processed routinely. Through the proposed provision, RSPA seeks to ensure that emergency processing, which affords less public review and a risk of reduced agency deliberation, is used only in the case of a risk of significant economic loss where urgency is required to avert the loss and the need for urgency could not have been avoided. The NPRM would create a third processing category, priority processing, for applications that do not qualify for emergency processing, but merit more expeditious consideration than that routinely accorded. An application that qualifies for priority processing, unlike one processed on an emergency basis, would be subject to public comment and the full degree of deliberation given to applications processed routinely. The priority designation merely would authorize RSPA to deviate from its ``first in, first out'' policy and consider the application ahead of those received earlier. Applications qualifying for priority processing would be those of governmental bodies when deemed by the Associate Administrator to be in the public interest, and those in which expeditious processing would be necessary to avoid significant economic loss. As in the case of emergency processing, if the significant economic loss were that of the applicant or another person engaged with the applicant in the hazmat activity, the need for the exemption may not have been foreseeable at a time when an application could have been processed routinely. Otherwise, the Associate Administrator would have the discretion to find that the application does not qualify for priority processing. The proposed rule would clarify the standards for exemption modification, suspension, and termination and give the Associate Administrator more flexibility as to which of the three remedies is appropriate in a given situation. Presently, the Associate Administrator may modify or suspend an exemption if its provisions are violated, or if new information suggests that the activity under the exemption creates a risk to life or property. The Associate Administrator may terminate an exemption if it is no longer consistent with the public interest, is no longer necessary due to a change in the regulations, or was granted on the basis of false or misleading information. The ``public interest'' criterion encompasses all grounds on which the Associate Administrator may find it justified to terminate an exemption, but is vague. Further, the sharp distinction the existing regulation draws between those conditions that justify modifying or suspending an exemption, and those that justify terminating it, handicap the Associate Administrator in taking the action that a particular circumstance recommends--for example, requiring the termination of an exemption when modification might suffice. The proposed rule would authorize modification whenever necessary to conform an exemption to changed statute or regulation, or other circumstances. It would authorize modification, suspension, or termination: (1) Whenever, because of a change in circumstances, the exemption no longer would be granted if applied for; (2) if it was granted on the basis of inaccurate or incomplete information; or (3) if the holder violates the exemption in a way that demonstrates insufficient competence or integrity to act under the exemption. In addition, any exemption granted on the basis of an application that the Associate Administrator finds was deliberately inaccurate or incomplete would be subject to modification, suspension, or termination, even where the exemption would have been granted absent the inaccuracy or incompleteness. Finally, the proposed rule would formalize procedures for requesting reconsideration of an exemption decision by the Associate Administrator and appealing the Associate Administrator's decision to the RSPA Administrator. During the pendency of a request for reconsideration or an appeal, the Associate Administrator or the Administrator, respectively, on a finding of risk to persons or property, could deem the modification, suspension, or termination effective for a period of up to 90 days. Otherwise the exemption, if current, would remain in effect until the decision. B. Approvals, Registrations, Reports The proposed rule establishes a framework for processing approval requests similar to that for exemption applications. It also describes procedures for filing registrations and reports with RSPA. The proposed rule specifies minimum contents of an application for approval to be filed with RSPA, identifies the RSPA office to which the filing would be directed, and sets forth procedures by which an application for approval would be processed. Next, the proposed rule sets forth standards and procedures for modifying, suspending and terminating approvals. The proposed standards are similar to the procedures for modifying, suspending and terminating exemptions. Modification would be authorized broadly to conform an approval to changed law or circumstances. Modification, suspension and termination all would be available if new information indicates that the approval would not be granted if now applied for; if the holder has demonstrated insufficient capability or integrity to perform the authorized activity; or if the application contained deliberately inaccurate or incomplete information. The holder would be allowed an opportunity to respond to the proposed action before it becomes final; however, where necessary to avert [[Page 47726]] a risk of harm to persons or property, the Associate Administrator could declare the modification, suspension or termination effective pending the holder's response and any subsequent reconsideration, for up to 90 days. Finally, the proposed rule would provide for reconsideration of the Associate Administrator's decision on granting, modifying, suspending or terminating an approval, and for appeal of that decision to the Administrator. C. Miscellaneous Amendments The proposed rule would amend a number of procedural provisions of 49 CFR parts 107, 171, 172, 173, and 178. Amendments would be made for clarity in Secs. 107.202, 107.203, 107.205, 107.211, 107.213 (new section), 107.217, 107.223, 107.227, 107.331, 171.1, 171.2, 171.8, 172.302, 173.22a, and 178.3. Requirements for exemption holders now found at Appendix B to subpart B of part 107, would be moved to Secs. 172.302(c) and 173.22a(c). Several provisions governing preemption determinations would be revised. The NPRM would modify Sec. 107.205(a) to delete the requirement that the applicant notify the affected State, local, or tribal government that it has 45 days in which to comment on the application for preemption. Because the date on which the government body receives the applicant's notice is not fixed to the date on which the application is published in the Federal Register, this specification is somewhat arbitrary. The State, local, or tribal government would continue to have, ordinarily, 45 days in which to comment, but this time frame would simply be specified in the Federal Register notice setting forth the application. Section 107.209(b) would be deleted. The Associate Administrator's authority to issue a preemption determination on his or her own initiative was eliminated by the Hazardous Materials Transportation Uniform Safety Act, Public Law 101-615, Sec. 13 (Nov. 16, 1990). Sections 107.209(d) and 107.221(d) would be amended to specify more concretely who would be given personal notice of a preemption or waiver of preemption determination. Presently, the Associate Administrator notifies each person ``readily identifiable * * * as one who is affected by the determination.'' Appeal rights of parties depend on timely receipt of the Associate Administrator's preemption decision. The present standard is vague and could prompt a challenge by a person who did not receive notice of a decision. The proposed rule limits personal notice of the decision to a specified group of persons: those who commented substantially on the matter (this would exclude, for instance, those who merely submitted form letters favoring or opposing preemption) and those who requested notice. Section 107.305(b) would be clarified in two regards. Additional language would clarify the right of a regulated party to examine an inspector's credentials, but prohibit that party from reproducing them. In addition, it would make explicit the inspector's authority to employ reasonable means of information gathering and documentation in performing an inspection. These means include, but are not limited to, interviewing and taking statements from representatives of the inspected person, photocopying, photographing, and taking audio and video recordings. An added provision of Sec. 107.305(b) would authorize the Director, Office of Hazardous Materials Enforcement (OHME), or his delegated representative, to issue a subpoena for the production of documentary or other tangible evidence. This authority is vested in the Administrator by Sec. 107.13(a) and would be delegated by the proposed rule from the Administrator to the OHME Director. A person on whom a subpoena is served would have the opportunity to apply to the RSPA Chief Counsel within 10 days of service to modify or quash the subpoena. A new Sec. 171.2(h) explicitly would prohibit creating or altering an exemption, approval, registration, or other official document to fraudulently indicate authority to offer or transport hazardous materials or manufacture packagings for hazardous materials. Similarly, offering a hazardous material for transportation or transporting a hazardous material in commerce, or representing, marking, certifying, or selling a packaging, under a false or altered exemption, approval, registration, or similar document would be prohibited. Currently, 18 U.S.C. 1001 prescribes a criminal sanction for knowingly or willfully making or using a false document in a matter within the jurisdiction of a Federal agency. The proposed rule would create a separate civil sanction. Liability for a civil penalty would arise only when a violation is committed knowingly within the meaning of 49 U.S.C. 5123(a)(1); that is, when the person either knew or, in the exercise of reasonable care, should have known that the document was false or altered. Accordingly, for example, a carrier would not be subject to a civil penalty for transporting a hazardous material under authority of an exemption altered by a shipper, absent facts establishing the carrier's knowledge that the exemption was altered. In addition, the proposed rule would amend Sec. 178.3 by adding a new paragraph (d) to specifically prohibit anyone, other than the exemption holder, a person with party status to an exemption, or a third party tester, from certifying that a packaging meets the terms of an exemption. This provision is necessary to assure that packagings manufactured under the terms of an exemption are marked and certified only by those persons authorized to do so. V. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices A. Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures This notice of proposed rulemaking is not considered a significant regulatory action under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 and, therefore, was not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. The notice is not significant according to the Regulatory Policies and Procedures of the Department of Transportation (44 FR 11034). The proposed rule would not result in any additional costs to persons subject to the HMR, but would result in modest cost savings to a small number of them and to the agency. Because of the minimal economic impact of this rule, preparation of a regulatory impact analysis or regulatory evaluation is not warranted. This certification may be revised as a result of public comment. B. Executive Order 12612 This action has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and criteria in Executive Order 12612 (``Federalism''). This proposed rulemaking has no substantial effects on States, local governments, or Indian tribes and does not impair their ability to impose their own procedures for obtaining an exemption or approval, or for registering and reporting. Therefore, preparation of a federalism assessment is not warranted. C. Regulatory Flexibility Act I certify that this notice of proposed rulemaking will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This notice proposes to amend existing and add new procedural provisions to clarify existing practice. The amendments contained in this notice do not impose any new requirements on persons subject to the HMR; thus, there are no direct or indirect adverse economic [[Page 47727]] impacts for small units of government, businesses, or other organizations. D. Paperwork Reduction Act Under 49 U.S.C. 5108, the information management requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) do not apply to this proposed rule. VI. List of Subjects 49 CFR Part 107 Administrative practice and procedure, Hazardous material transportation, Packaging and containers, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. 49 CFR Part 171 Exports, Hazardous materials transportation, Hazardous waste, Imports, Incorporation by reference, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. 49 CFR Part 172 Hazardous materials transportation, Hazardous waste, Labels, Markings, Packaging and containers, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. 49 CFR Part 173 Hazardous materials transportation, Packaging and containers, Radioactive materials, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Uranium. 49 CFR Part 178 Hazardous materials transportation, Motor vehicle safety, Packaging and containers, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. In consideration of the foregoing, 49 CFR Chapter I would be amended as follows: PART 107--HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAM PROCEDURES 1. The authority citation for Part 107 would continue to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101-5127, 44701; 49 CFR 1.45, 1.53. 2. In Sec. 107.3, definitions would be added in alphabetical order to read as follows: Sec. 107.3 Definitions. Accident means an event resulting in the unintended and unanticipated release of hazardous material. Acting knowingly means acting or failing to act while: (1) Having actual knowledge of the facts giving rise to the violation, or (2) Having the knowledge that a reasonable person acting in the same circumstances and exercising due care would have had. Administrator means the Administrator, Research and Special Programs Administration. Applicant means the person in whose name an exemption, renewed or modified exemption, grant of party status to an exemption, approval, or registration is requested to be issued. Application means a request under this subpart for an exemption, a renewal or modification of an exemption, a grant of party status to an exemption, an approval, or a registration. * * * * * Associate Administrator means the Associate Administrator for Hazardous Materials Safety. * * * * * Filed means received at the Research and Special Programs Administration office designated in the applicable provision or, if no office is specified, at the Office of Hazardous Materials Exemptions and Approvals (DHM-30), U.S. Department of Transportation, Research and Special Programs Administration, 400 Seventh Street SW, Washington DC, 20590-0001. Holder means the person in whose name an exemption or approval has been issued. * * * * * Investigation includes investigations authorized under 49 U.S.C. 5121 and inspections authorized under 49 U.S.C. 5118 and 5121. Manufacturing exemption means an exemption from compliance with requirements that otherwise must be met before representing, marking, certifying, selling or offering a packaging or container as meeting the requirements of this subchapter or subchapter B governing its use in the transportation in commerce of a hazardous material. Party means a person, other than a holder, authorized to act under the terms of an exemption. * * * * * Registration means a written acknowledgement from the Associate Administrator that the registrant is performing a function for which registration is required under subchapter C. For purposes of this subpart, ``registration'' does not include registration under subpart F or G of this part. Report means information, other than an application, registration or part thereof, required to be submitted to the Associate Administrator pursuant to subchapter C. * * * * * Shipper exemption means an exemption from compliance with requirements of this subchapter or subchapter C that otherwise must be met before offering a hazardous material for transportation or transporting a hazardous material in commerce. * * * * * 3. In Sec. 107.5, paragraph (a) would be revised to read as follows: Sec. 107.5 Request for confidential treatment. (a) If any person filing a document with the Associate Administrator claims that some or all the information contained in the document is exempt from the mandatory public disclosure requirements of the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552), is information referred to in 18 U.S.C. 1905, or is otherwise exempt by law from public disclosure, and if that person requests the Associate Administrator not to disclose the information, that person shall file, together with the document, a second copy of the document with the confidential information deleted. The person shall indicate each page of the original document that is confidential or contains confidential information by marking or stamping ``confidential'' on each page for which a claim of confidentiality is made, and may file a statement specifying the justification for the claim of confidentiality. If the person states that the information comes within the exception in 5 U.S.C. 552(b)(4) for trade secrets and commercial or financial information, that person must include a statement as to why the information is privileged or confidential. If the person filing a document does not mark or stamp a document as confidential or submit a second copy of the document with the confidential information deleted, the Associate Administrator may assume that there is no objection to public disclosure of the document in its entirety. * * * * * 4. Subpart B of part 107 would be revised to read as follows: Subpart B--Exemptions Sec. 107.101 Purpose and scope. This subpart prescribes procedures for the issuance, modification and termination of exemptions from requirements of this subchapter, or subchapter C of this chapter. Sec. 107.105 Application for exemption. (a) Each application for an exemption or modification of an exemption must-- (1) Be submitted in duplicate to: Associate Administrator for Hazardous Materials Safety, U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, DC 20590-0001. Attention: Exemptions, DHM-31; [[Page 47728]] (2) State the name, street and mailing addresses, and telephone number of the applicant; if the applicant is not an individual, state the name of an individual designated as an agent of the applicant for all purposes related to the application; (3) For a manufacturing exemption, state the name and street address of each of the applicant's or contractor's facilities where manufacturing under the exemption will occur; (4) If the applicant is not a resident of the United States, contain a designation of agent for service in accordance with Sec. 107.7, and a statement that the applicant consents to personal jurisdiction in the United States for purposes of the Federal hazardous material transportation law related to the exemption; (5) Cite the regulation from which the applicant seeks relief, including the publication year of the Code of Federal Regulations volume from which the citation is taken; (6) If known by the applicant, list identifying numbers of all exemptions, approvals and registrations previously or currently held by the applicant under this chapter that are related to the subject matter of the application; (7) Specify the proposed mode(s) of transportation; (8) Describe in detail the proposed exemption (e.g., alternative packaging, test, procedure or activity). Including, as appropriate, written descriptions, drawings, flow charts, plans and other supporting documents; (9) Specify the proposed duration or schedule of events for which the exemption is sought; (10) State why the applicant wishes to be relieved from compliance with the specified regulations and, if the exemption is requested for a fixed period, how compliance will be achieved at the end of that period; (11) If the applicant seeks expedited processing under Sec. 107.115 or Sec. 107.117, set forth the supporting facts and grounds; (12) Identify and describe the hazardous materials planned for transportation under the exemption. Provide the chemical name, common name, hazard class, identification number, packing group, form, quantity, properties, and characteristics of hazardous material to be offered or transported in conjunction with the exemption, including composition and percentage (specified by volume or weight) of each chemical, if a solution or mixture; (13) List each packaging, including specification or exemption number, as applicable, to be used in conjunction with the requested exemption; (14) For alternative packagings, document quality assurance controls necessary to provide safe performance, including package design, manufacture, performance test criteria, in-service performance and service life limitations; (15) Include information describing all relevant shipping and accident experience of which the applicant is aware that relates to the application; (16) Identify any increased risk to safety or property that may result if the exemption is granted, and specify the measures that the applicant considers necessary or appropriate to address that risk; (17) Substantiate, with applicable analyses, data or test results, that the proposed alternative will achieve a level of safety that: (i) Is at least equal to that required by the regulation from which the exemption is sought, or (ii) If the regulations do not establish a level of safety, is consistent with the public interest and adequately will protect against the risks to life and property inherent in the transportation of hazardous material in commerce; and (18) For an exemption involving a hazardous material, packaging material, packaging design or technology where direct comparison cannot be made to an existing standard in subchapter C, provide an analysis that: (i) identifies each hazard associated with the proposed activity, (ii) identifies each potential failure mode and the probability of its occurrence, and (iii) describe how the risk associated with each hazard and failure mode is controlled for life of a packaging or duration of an activity to a level comparable to that provided by the regulation and is consistent with the public interest. (b) Unless expedited processing under Sec. 107.115 or Sec. 107.117 is requested and granted, applications are processed in the order in which they are filed. For timely consideration, an application should be submitted at least 180 days before the requested effective date. (c) To request confidential treatment for information contained in the application, the applicant must comply with Sec. 107.5(a). Sec. 107.107 Application for party status. (a) Any person eligible to apply for an exemption may apply to be made party to an application or an existing exemption, other than a manufacture, mark, and sell exemption. (b) Each application filed under this section must-- (1) Be submitted in duplicate to: Associate Administrator for Hazardous Materials Safety, U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, DC 20590-0001. Attention: Exemptions, DHM-31; (2) Identify by number the exemption application or exemption to which the applicant seeks to become a party; (3) State the name, address and telephone number of the applicant; if the applicant is not an individual, state the name of an individual designated as the applicant's agent for all purposes related to the application; and (4) If the applicant is not a resident of the United States, provide a designation of agent for service in accordance with Sec. 107.7, and a statement that the applicant consents to personal jurisdiction in the United States for purposes of the Federal hazardous material transportation law related to the exemption. (c) The Associate Administrator grants party status to an applicant on finding that-- (1) The applicant is eligible to apply for the exemption; (2) The application or exemption to which the applicant seeks to become a party concerns a continuing matter; and (3) Granting party status does not compromise information qualified for confidential treatment under Sec. 107.5. (d) A party to an exemption is subject to all terms of that exemption, including the expiration date. If a party to an exemption wishes to renew party status, the exemption renewal procedures set forth in Sec. 107.109 apply. Sec. 107.109 Application for renewal. (a) Each application for renewal of an exemption must-- (1) Be submitted in duplicate to: Associate Administrator for Hazardous Materials Safety, U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, DC 20590-0001. Attention: Exemptions, DHM-31; (2) Identify by number the exemption for which renewal is requested; (3) State the name, address, and telephone number of the applicant; if the applicant is not an individual, state the name of an individual designated as an agent of the applicant for all purposes related to the application; (4) Include either a certification by the applicant that the original application, as it may have been updated by any application for renewal, remains accurate and complete; or an amendment to the previously submitted application as is necessary to update and assure the accuracy and completeness of the application, with certification by the applicant that the application as amended is accurate and complete; and [[Page 47729]] (5) Include a statement describing all relevant shipping and accident experience of which the applicant is aw","truncated":true,"body_characters":79461}