# Hazardous Materials: Harmonization With the United Nations Recommendations, International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code, and International Civil Aviation Organization's Technical Instructions

- **operation:** document
- **citation:** 62 FR 24690
- **title:** Hazardous Materials: Harmonization With the United Nations Recommendations, International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code, and International Civil Aviation Organization's Technical Instructions
- **source type:** rulemaking
- **agency:** Research and Special Programs Administration
- **status:** historical
- **official:** true
- **published on:** 1997-05-06
- **effective on:** Not available
- **summary:** This final rule amends the Hazardous Materials Regulations to maintain alignment with corresponding provisions of international standards. Because of recent changes to the International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code (IMDG Code), the International Civil Aviation Organization's Technical Instructions for the Safe Transport of Dangerous Goods by Air (ICAO Technical Instructions), and the United Nations Recommendations on the Transport of Dangerous Goods (UN Recommendations), these revisions are necessary to facilitate the transport of hazardous materials in international commerce.
- **machine formats:** - **json:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/federal-register-97-10481.json
- **markdown:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/federal-register-97-10481.md
- **app url:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/federal-register-97-10481
- **source url:** https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/1997/05/06/97-10481/hazardous-materials-harmonization-with-the-united-nations-recommendations-international-maritime
**body:**

Federal Register, Volume 62 Issue 87 (Tuesday, May 6, 1997) [Federal Register Volume 62, Number 87 (Tuesday, May 6, 1997)] [Rules and Regulations] [Pages 24690-24743] From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [ www.gpo.gov ] [FR Doc No: 97-10481] [[Page 24689]] _______________________________________________________________________ Part II Department of Transportation _______________________________________________________________________ Research and Special Programs Administration _______________________________________________________________________ 49 CFR Part 171, et al. Hazardous Materials: Harmonization With the United Nations Recommendations, International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code, and International Civil Aviation Organization's Technical Instructions; Final Rule Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 87 / Tuesday, May 6, 1997 / Rules and Regulations [[Page 24690]] ======================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Research and Special Programs Administration 49 CFR Parts 171, 172, 173, 175, 176, 178 [Docket No. HM-215B; Amdt Nos. 171-153, 172-154, 173-261, 175-86, 176- 43, 178-119] RIN 2137-AC82 Hazardous Materials: Harmonization With the United Nations Recommendations, International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code, and International Civil Aviation Organization's Technical Instructions AGENCY: Research and Special Programs Administration (RSPA), DOT. ACTION: Final rule. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: This final rule amends the Hazardous Materials Regulations to maintain alignment with corresponding provisions of international standards. Because of recent changes to the International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code (IMDG Code), the International Civil Aviation Organization's Technical Instructions for the Safe Transport of Dangerous Goods by Air (ICAO Technical Instructions), and the United Nations Recommendations on the Transport of Dangerous Goods (UN Recommendations), these revisions are necessary to facilitate the transport of hazardous materials in international commerce. DATES: Effective date: The effective date of these amendments is October 1, 1997. Compliance date: RSPA is authorizing immediate voluntary compliance. However, persons voluntarily complying with these regulations should be aware that petitions for reconsideration may be received and, as a result of RSPA's evaluation of those petitions, the amendments adopted in this final rule could be subject to further revision. Incorporation by reference. The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in these amendments has been approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of October 1, 1997. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bob Richard, Assistant International Standards Coordinator, telephone (202) 366-0656, or Joan McIntyre, Office of Hazardous Materials Standards, telephone (202) 366-8553, Research and Special Programs Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20590-0001. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background On December 21, 1990, the Research and Special Programs Administration (RSPA) published a final rule [Docket HM-181; 55 FR 52402] which comprehensively revised the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR), 49 CFR Parts 171 to 180, with respect to hazard communication, classification, and packaging requirements, based on the UN Recommendations. One intended effect of the rule was to facilitate the international transportation of hazardous materials by ensuring a basic consistency between the HMR and international regulations. The UN Recommendations are not regulations, but are recommendations issued `by the UN Committee of Experts on the Transport of Dangerous Goods (UNCOE). These recommendations are amended and updated biennially by the UNCOE and are distributed to nations throughout the world. They serve as the basis for national, regional, and international modal regulations (specifically the IMDG Code, issued by the International Maritime Organization (IMO), and the ICAO Technical Instructions, issued by the ICAO Dangerous Goods Panel). In 49 CFR 171.12, the HMR authorize shipments prepared in accordance with the IMDG Code if all or part of the transportation is by vessel, subject to certain conditions and limitations. Offering, accepting and transporting hazardous materials by aircraft, in conformance with the ICAO Technical Instructions, and by motor vehicle either before or after being transported by aircraft, are authorized in Sec. 171.11 (subject to certain conditions and limitations). On December 29, 1994, RSPA issued a final rule [Docket HM-215A; 59 FR 67390] amending the HMR by incorporating changes to more fully align the HMR with the seventh and eighth revised editions of the UN Recommendations, Amendment 27 to the IMDG Code and the 1995-96 ICAO Technical Instructions. The final rule provided consistency with international air and sea transportation requirements which became effective January 1, 1995. In a final rule published December 16, 1996, RSPA incorporated the latest editions of the ICAO Technical Instructions and the IMDG Code into the HMR to ensure that international shippers could begin complying with changes to international air and vessel standards going into effect on January 1, 1997. That final rule authorized compliance with either Amendment 27 or Amendment 28 of the IMDG Code and either the 1995-96 or 1997-98 ICAO Technical Instructions until June 1, 1997. This final rule amends the HMR based on the ninth revised edition of the UN Recommendations, the 1997-98 ICAO Technical Instructions, and Amendment 28 to the IMDG Code. It is intended to more fully align the HMR with international air and sea transport requirements which became effective January 1, 1997. Other changes are based on feedback from the regulated industry and RSPA initiatives. II. Summary of Comments RSPA received over 40 comments in response to the Docket HM-215B Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), which was published in the Federal Register on October 25, 1996 (61 FR 55364). Comments were submitted by chemical manufacturers, trade associations, packaging manufacturers, and rail and vessel carriers. Commenters were supportive of RSPA's efforts to maintain alignment with international standards. Certain issues proposed in the NPRM received little or no comment. Other issues, including a proposed definition for ``aerosol,'' a proposed approval requirement for certain nitroglycerin mixtures, and various proposed changes for organic peroxides and explosives packagings, were the focus of most comments. Several commenters requested transitional provisions and other amendments to the HMR as part of this initiative. In this final rule, RSPA is providing a delayed compliance period for implementation of these changes; however, many other suggestions are beyond the scope of the proposed changes in this rule and first should be the subject of an NPRM to offer adequate opportunity for notice and comment. III. Summary of Regulatory Changes by Section Listed below is a section-by-section summary of changes and, as applicable, a discussion of comments received. Part 171 Section 171.7 RSPA proposed to add or update various American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) standards, including an ASTM standard for flash point determination (ASTM D-3828-93) which establishes whether a material is capable of sustaining combustion in relation to classifying flammable liquids (ASTM D-4206-96), and the ASTM standard for assessing corrosivity to metals (ASTM G 31-72 (Reapproved 1995)). ASTM D-3828-93 is the Standard Test Method for Flash Point by [[Page 24691]] Small Scale Closed Tester. This method is equivalent to ASTM D-3278 but specifically applies to testing petroleum products and lubricants. ASTM D 4206-96 Standard Test Method for Sustained Burning of Liquid Mixtures Using the Small Scale Open-Cup Apparatus is equivalent to the test method currently provided in Part 173, Appendix H-Method of Testing for Sustained Combustibility. In addition, RSPA proposed to incorporate the most current versions of the ICAO Technical Instructions, the IMDG Code, the UN Recommendations and the UN Manual of Tests and Criteria. Updated references for the IMDG Code and the ICAO Technical Instructions were adopted in a final rule published December 16, 1996 [61 FR 65958] with an effective date of June 1, 1997. Two references were proposed for incorporation under the Transportation of Dangerous Goods (TDG) Regulations issued by Transport Canada. These new entries reference Schedule 21 and Schedule 22, which were adopted in 1995. Section 171.8 In the NPRM, RSPA proposed several new definitions, including a definition for ``Aerosol'' which is consistent with provisions of Sec. 173.306(a)(3). As noted in the NPRM, the definition for aerosols in the IMDG Code and the ICAO Technical Instructions includes containers that are filled solely with a gas, whereas aerosol containers authorized in Sec. 173.306(a)(3) may be charged with a gas only for the purpose of expelling a liquid, powder or paste. RSPA received two comments opposing the proposed definition of ``Aerosol''. Both commenters (a chemical manufacturing company and The Chemical Specialties Manufacturers Association (CSMA)) believed the definition in the HMR should be worded in the same manner as in the UN Recommendations. These commenters also claimed that the proposed definition may not cover foams, pastes, gels and other liquids which are not ejected in suspension in a gas. CSMA further noted that the proposed definition only recognizes metal aerosol containers while international standards authorize glass and plastic as materials of construction for aerosol containers. RSPA's proposed definition for ``Aerosol'' corresponds to current requirements for aerosols in Sec. 173.306(a)(3). Paragraph (a)(3) contains an authorization for the use of metal nonspecification packagings charged with a solution of materials and compressed gas or gases (i.e., aerosols) with certain restrictions applying to internal pressure, filling limits and testing of the container. The capacity of this container cannot exceed 50 cubic inches or 27.7 fluid ounces. These provisions apply only to solutions of materials and compressed gas or gases which are not poisonous (other than Division 6.1, Packing Group III materials). A final rule published October 28, 1991, under Docket HM-210 [56 FR 55471], was issued for clarification and to promote the safe transportation of gases shipped under limited quantity provisions. This final rule stated, in part: RSPA is concerned about the serious potential hazards posed by shipping flammable compressed gases, under limited quantity or consumer commodity provisions, when a compressed gas is the primary product and not merely an aerosol propellant additive. RSPA and its predecessor agencies never intended that gases other than those used as a propellant could be excepted from any of the HMR when a package has more than a 4-fluid ounce capacity. Thus, current aerosol provisions in the HMR do not correspond to the aerosol definition in international standards, which authorizes a gas to be expelled ``without a liquid, paste, or powder.'' Nor does RSPA intend to adopt such a provision, because filling a container solely with a gas, such as butane, poses a significantly greater risk than filling the container with a liquid, paste or powder which is expelled by a butane gas due to greater quantities of gas contained in aerosols that do not contain liquid, paste or powder. Furthermore, in response to commenters' concern that the proposed definition may not cover foams, pastes, gels and other liquids which are not ejected in suspension in a gas, RSPA believes that because foams or gels would be considered liquids expelled by a gas, it is not necessary to specifically list them. Another difference between domestic requirements for aerosols and international standards is that the HMR authorize only metal containers, while non-metallic (e.g., made from glass or plastic) containers are authorized internationally. A November 13, 1995 response to a petition for reconsideration issued under Docket HM-215A [60 FR 56957] emphasized that only metal aerosol containers are authorized for use. This document noted that ``RSPA is not aware of any proposed industry standards for the manufacture and use of aerosol containers other than those made of metal.'' Nor is RSPA aware of any subsequent ongoing action to propose industry standards for the manufacture and use of non-metallic aerosol containers. In addition, RSPA proposed corresponding changes in Secs. 171.11, 171.12 and 171.12a to clarify the proposed definition of aerosols as it applies to aerosols imported in accordance with the ICAO Technical Instructions, the IMDG Code and the TDG Regulations. These changes, as well as the definition for aerosols, are adopted as proposed in this final rule. RSPA also proposed definitions for ``SADT'' (self-accelerating decomposition temperature), salvage packagings and intermediate packagings. No comments were received on these proposed definitions, and they are adopted as proposed. Sections 171.11, 171.12, and 171.12a These sections authorize shipments prepared under the ICAO Technical Instructions, the IMDG Code, and the TDG Regulations, respectively. RSPA proposed to remove the requirement to include the words ``Dangerous When Wet'' on shipping papers in association with the basic description for Division 4.3 materials. Commenters uniformly supported this proposal, stating that the change was compatible with international standards and that the ``Dangerous When Wet'' hazard is clearly communicated through indication of Division 4.3 as part of the basic shipping description and through use of Division 4.3 labels and placards. Therefore, RSPA is removing the requirement for ``Dangerous When Wet'' to appear on shipping papers in association with the basic description. RSPA also proposed that the words ``Toxic Inhalation Hazard'' be added as an alternative to ``Poison Inhalation Hazard'' or ``Inhalation Hazard'' and that ``Toxic'' or ``Toxic Gas'' be added as alternatives to ``Poison'' or ``Poison Gas''. A corresponding provision for shipping paper descriptions was proposed for Sec. 172.203(m). Two comments expressing opposing viewpoints were received. One commenter, an international chemical and industrial gases manufacturer, supported this proposal, stating that this alternative will simplify compliance when shipping materials poisonous by inhalation. The other commenter, a vessel carrier, believed consistency could be achieved through use of only the ``Toxic'' designation. This commenter claimed that providing an option for use of either term will confuse people in the field. RSPA does not agree and is adopting the alternative ``Toxic Inhalation Hazard'' as proposed in the NPRM. However, RSPA is not adopting proposed modifications to [[Page 24692]] POISON and POISON GAS label and placard references. These references were recently modified by the Docket HM-206 final rule [62 FR 1227] and RSPA believes additional modifications to these references are unnecessary. Also, as discussed above for Sec. 171.8, RSPA is adopting a provision to allow only aerosols meeting the definition of ``aerosol'' in Sec. 171.8 to be imported in accordance with the ICAO Technical Instructions, IMDG Code and TDG regulations. Section 171.14 A new paragraph (d) is added to provide a delayed implementation date for amendments adopted in this final rule. The effective date of this final rule is October 1, 1997. However, RSPA is authorizing an immediate voluntary compliance date to allow shippers to prepare their international shipments in accordance with the new ICAO, IMDG Code and HMR provisions. RSPA is also authorizing a delayed mandatory compliance with the new requirements, until October 1, 1998. This delay is comparable to the transition provisions provided in the final rule under Docket HM-215A and offers a sufficient phase-in period to implement new provisions and deplete current stocks of shipping papers, labels, placards, and containers affected by the new requirements. In addition, paragraph (d)(2) permits intermixing of old and new hazard communication requirements until October 1, 1998. Part 172 Section 172.101 A new paragraph (c)(14) is added to allow isomers of materials listed in the Hazardous Materials Table (HMT) which meet the same hazard class, subsidiary risk and packing group to be identified using the listed shipping description. One commenter suggested adding a provision to exclude isomers listed specifically in the HMT. RSPA agrees and is revising this paragraph to reflect the commenter's suggestion. A new paragraph (c)(15) is adopted to allow hydrates of inorganic substances to be described using the proper shipping name for the equivalent anhydrous material. In this final rule, RSPA is clarifying the proposed regulatory text to indicate that the hydrate must meet the same hazard class or division, subsidiary risk(s) and packing group of the equivalent anhydrous material, unless the hydrate is specifically identified in the Table. Paragraph (f) is revised to acknowledge that Division 6.2 materials (other than regulated medical waste) do not have packing group assignments. Changes to the HMT include: New Packing Group I entries added for certain commodities, including Adhesives, Resin solutions, Paint and Paint-related material, Disinfectants, Dyes, and Oxidizing liquid, n.o.s. An alternative proper shipping name ``Refrigerant gas'' plus the ``R'' number is added to numerous entries, consistent with the ninth revised edition of the UN Recommendations. Current entries that contain an italicized ``R'' number are revised to include the ``R'' number in Roman type as part of the ``Refrigerant gas'' alternative proper shipping name. One commenter engaged in reselling prepackaged refrigerants expressed concern that some refrigerant manufacturers would use the newly authorized ``Refrigerant gas, R ***'' proper shipping name while others would continue to use the current chemical name; consequently, a shipping paper description, package markings and emergency response information may not match. This commenter recommended that differences in proper shipping names resulting from mixed use of the original and alternative proper shipping name on markings, emergency response information and shipping papers be authorized indefinitely, as long as the same UN or NA identification number appears on the shipping paper, emergency response information, and package markings. RSPA does not agree. The HMT contains numerous entries providing an alternative proper shipping name. It is RSPA's opinion that to offer various mix and match provisions for such entries is impracticable and could result in greater confusion. Certain Class 1 entries assigned NA numbers for domestic transportation are removed. These include Explosive pest control devices and Propellant explosives (both liquid and solid). Domestic exceptions for these explosives are incorporated into the explosive packing instructions, where applicable. RSPA proposed a new entry and special provision for a nitroglycerin mixture containing more than 2 percent but not more than 10 percent nitroglycerin. The special provision sets forth a requirement that the Associate Administrator for Hazardous Materials Safety (AAHMS) must specifically authorize the nitroglycerin mixture as a Division 4.1 material, as well as approve the assigned packing group and packaging method before the material may be transported as a Division 4.1 material. A chemical manufacturer and several pharmaceutical manufacturers opposed this proposal. According to these commenters, a preparation consisting of 10% nitroglycerin is used in the treatment of acute angina attacks. They claimed that, unless this proposal is dropped or the domestic supplier of this material is granted an approval to ship the preparation as a Division 4.1 material, transporting this material as a Division 1.1D explosive would have a significant negative impact on the continued production and distribution of this product. RSPA does not agree. A certain preparation containing 10% nitroglycerin was considered to be a UN 0143, 1.1D explosive by the UNCOE in December 1994, based on the fact that the preparation detonated in the bonfire test prescribed in test series 6(c) of the UN Manual of Tests and Criteria. The UNCOE recognized that not all preparations containing 10% nitroglycerin behave the same. Therefore, the UNCOE adopted UN 3319 with a provision for each competent authority to authorize, either by approval or exemption, a preparation consisting of not more than 10% nitroglycerin as a Division 4.1 material based on test results. This provision is consistent with the existing provisions of Sec. 173.124(a)(1)(ii)(B) for desensitized explosive substances which require authorization, either by approval or exemption, by the AAHMS. RSPA believes that a 10% nitroglycerin preparation that will detonate in a fire should be considered a forbidden material according to Sec. 173.21(h). If the preparation is or may be explosive according to Sec. 173.54(a), it is forbidden for transport unless examined and approved under the provisions of Sec. 173.56. Depending on test results, the same preparation may be approved under Sec. 173.56 as a Division 4.1 material. RSPA does not believe the incorporation of UN 3319 with a lengthy transition period for shippers to obtain an approval or exemption, where appropriate, would seriously threaten the production of nitroglycerin pharmaceutical treatments in the United States. New entries are added for compressed gases and liquefied gases which are toxic and also meet flammable, corrosive, or oxidizing criteria. Packaging authorizations for the current entry ``Gas, refrigerated liquid'' are revised to reference the packaging provisions for cryogenic liquids. In addition, two new entries ``Gas, refrigerated liquid, flammable, n.o.s.'' and ``Gas, refrigerated liquid, oxidizing, n.o.s.'' are added. One commenter supported the proposal to change [[Page 24693]] packaging authorizations for ``Gas, refrigerated liquid'' to reference packagings for cryogenic liquids, but believed that packaging exceptions provided in Sec. 173.320 should be authorized for ``Gas, refrigerated liquid, n.o.s.'' and ``Gas, refrigerated liquid, oxidizing, n.o.s.'' The commenter claimed that this section should apply if the components of the mixture are exclusively various combinations of atmospheric gases and/or helium in cryogenic liquid form. RSPA agrees and is adding an exception in Column (8A) for these two entries. Several entries, such as Phenyl isocyanate and Phosphorous trichloride, are amended by revising the primary hazard class in Column (3) and/or Packing Group in Column (5). For some entries, such a change in hazard class or packing group also results in a corresponding removal of the ``+'' in Column (1). In Column (2) of the HMT, several proper shipping names are listed in Roman type, indicating that they are authorized proper shipping names. However, they are not listed as proper shipping names under the UN Recommendations, the ICAO Technical Instructions, or the IMDG Code. For consistency with the international regulations, RSPA is revising a number of proper shipping names, including ``Aircraft evacuation slides'', from Roman type to italics to indicate that they are no longer authorized proper shipping names. Certain entries, such as Diphenylmethane-4,4'-diisocyanate and Methyl benzoate (which do not meet toxicity criteria for a Division 6.1 Packing Group III material) are removed. These commodities were deleted from the List of Dangerous Goods in the ninth revised edition of the UN Recommendations. The packing group designation for ``Mercury, contained in manufactured articles'' is revised from Packing Group I to Packing Group III for consistency with the entry for ``Mercury'' and the ICAO Technical Instructions. To maintain consistency with the UN Recommendations, various proper shipping names are amended by the addition or removal of the word ``compressed'', ``inhibited'', ``liquefied'' or ``solution''. Several commenters indicated that although they generally support the international harmonization effort and overall intent to maintain consistency between the HMR, the UN Recommendations, the IMDG Code, and the ICAO Technical Instructions, they did not understand the basis for the addition or deletion of the words ``compressed,'' ``inhibited,'' `` liquefied'' or ``solution'' relative to clarifying certain existing shipping names. These amendments were adopted by the UNCOE, in part, to more effectively communicate the threat posed by certain materials in their different physical states, e.g., pressurized materials that may be transported as a liquid or as a gas. The description modifications were supported by several large industry groups at the time the UNCOE was considering the amendments. RSPA recognizes that revising proper shipping names to include or exclude these four modifiers to the key words identifying the hazardous materials poses problems that makes compliance difficult in the one- year period provided in Sec. 172.101(l)(1)(ii). Those difficulties and the associated additional costs of compliance were highlighted in comments provided by several shippers and carriers of industrial gases. In consideration of those comments, RSPA is providing an exception in Sec. 172.101(l)(3) that obviates the need for shippers and carriers to make special arrangements to remark bulk or non-bulk packagings used in the transportation of the affected hazardous materials within one year following the effective date of this rule. Rather, when the proper shipping name of a hazardous material is modified only by the addition or omission of the word ``compressed,'' ``inhibited,'' `` liquefied'' or ``solution,'' its packaging may be marked with the previously prescribed proper shipping name for that material for a period of five years following the effective date of this rule. The extended compliance period is intended to allow re-marking to be accomplished in association with the periodic five-year retest required for most bulk packagings. To minimize the effects of other amendments, RSPA is incorporating an extended transition period comparable to that provided in Docket HM- 215A. This will allow industry time to deplete current stocks of pre- printed shipping papers, labels and packagings affected by the new shipping names and to implement the changes within their respective companies, including providing any necessary training to employees. Two commenters pointed out a conflict in the proposed addition of a Division 5.1 subsidiary risk label for the entry ``Carbon dioxide and oxygen mixtures''. RSPA has stated previously that this subsidiary risk should be recognized only when a mixture contains a concentration of oxygen greater than 23.5%, requiring a subsidiary risk label for this entry without regard to the amount of oxygen in the mixture is inconsistent. Although the UN Recommendations prescribe a subsidiary 5.1 risk label without any distinctions, RSPA agrees with these commenters. Therefore, a new Special Provision 77 is added to limit the requirement for this subsidiary risk label to mixtures having an oxygen concentration greater than 23.5% for domestic transportation. In addition, RSPA intends to bring this inconsistency to the attention of the UN Committee of Experts. RSPA is adjusting quantity limits for certain materials identified as poisonous by inhalation when transported by passenger or cargo aircraft or passenger railcar. Many of these changes are consistent with current quantity limits prescribed in the ICAO Technical Instructions. Certain other materials are forbidden for transportation by aircraft or passenger railcar because they have been identified as meeting the criteria for poisonous by inhalation and assigned Hazard Zone A for liquids and Hazard Zones A and B for gases. Other changes to the HMT include: (1) Creating separate entries for ``Ammonia, anhydrous'' and ``Ammonia solutions''; (2) adding ``First aid kits'' as an alternative proper shipping name for the entry ``Chemical kits'' if the first aid kits contain hazardous materials; (3) combining entries for ``Chlorite solution'' and ``Hypochlorite solutions''; (4) removing ``Methyl alcohol'' as an authorized proper shipping name for ``Methanol'' but retaining it in italics as a cross reference; (5) adding a Class 3 subsidiary risk in Column (6) for several entries; and (6) creating a new entry for ``Aerosols (engine starting fluid)'' to indicate that these aerosols are prohibited on both passenger and cargo only aircraft. RSPA is not incorporating various entries suggested by commenters that were not proposed in the NPRM. As noted previously, these suggestions are beyond the scope of the proposed changes in this rule and should be subject to notice and comment. Appendix B to Sec. 172.101 RSPA proposed to add, remove or revise a number of entries in the HMR's List of Marine Pollutants. These changes are based on Amendment 27 (to the extent not already incorporated in HM-215A) and Amendment 28 of the IMDG Code. Currently, Appendix B contains a duplicate entry for ``Maneb or Maneb preparations''; however, one entry has supplemental information in Roman type, while the supplemental information in the other entry is shown in italics. RSPA proposed to remove the entry listed in all Roman type. One [[Page 24694]] commenter indicated that the other entry should be retained for consistency with the IMDG Code. The commenter is correct; RSPA is retaining the entry ``Maneb or Maneb preparations with not less than 60 per cent maneb.'' In addition, several commenters suggested various other revisions to the list and RSPA has amended the list accordingly. Section 172.102 A new special provision 15 is added as proposed to prescribe quantity limits and packaging for chemical kits and first aid kits. Other special provisions are added to authorize reclassification for certain commodities and to provide exceptions based on testing, concentrations, or stabilization for materials such as Maneb, aqueous solutions of inorganic solid nitrates, and Ferrocerium. RSPA proposed to assign Special Provision 30 to the international entry for ``Sulfur'' to indicate that this material is not subject to the HMR when transported in a non-bulk packaging or if formed in a specific shape. The Sulphur Institute strongly supported this change and recommended rewording Special Provision 30 by removing the phrase ``when transported domestically''. RSPA agrees and this special provision is revised accordingly. One commenter suggested RSPA revise Special Provision 47 to incorporate a special provision adopted in the ICAO Technical Instructions which allows small packagings consisting of sealed packets containing less than 10 ml of a Packing Group II or III flammable liquid absorbed onto a solid material to be excepted from the HMR if no free liquid is present in the packet. The commenter believed this provision is consistent with a previous letter of opinion RSPA issued concerning alcohol wipes and should be adopted as an ``A'' special provision, at a minimum, for consistency with ICAO. RSPA agrees and is incorporating this exception into Special Provision 47 to apply to all modes of transport. RSPA proposed to add a new special provision A25 to authorize polyester resin kits in certain quantities to be packaged in non- specification packagings for transportation by aircraft. One commenter suggested removing this special provision, as well as Special Provision 40 (which currently is assigned to polyester resin kits), and incorporating all packaging provisions for polyester resin kits in Sec. 173.152. After further consideration, RSPA agrees and is adding specific packaging provisions in Sec. 173.152 applicable to all modes of transport for polyester resin kits. In addition to revising the proper shipping name ``Aluminum smelting by-products or Aluminum remelting by-products'' (formerly Aluminum processing by-products), a new special provision B115 is assigned to this entry to permit certain non-specification bulk packagings for these products. Commenters representing the aluminum industry responded favorably to this proposal. A commenter suggested two modifications--one to add a new special provision applicable to both non-bulk and bulk packaging to include certain materials which exhibit corrosivity at PG II and III levels and the other to allow both special provisions to apply to ``magnesium granules.'' RSPA is adding a new Special Provision 128 and revising Sec. 172.101 Table entries for UN 3096 and UN 3131 (Packing Groups II and III) to allow aluminum smelting by-products and aluminum remelting by-products which are described by a generic proper shipping name because they meet the criteria for both Division 4.3 and Class 8, to be packaged in accordance with Special Provision B115. However, RSPA is not expanding this provision to include non-bulk packagings, nor will Magnesium granules be assigned B115. In the NPRM, RSPA proposed a special provision for aluminum by-products which would eliminate the need for DOT Exemption DOT-E-11602. RSPA does not believe it appropriate at this time to adopt, without public notice and comment, new provisions which go beyond the relief authorized in DOT-E-11602 and proposed in the NPRM. Special Provision N50, which provides an exception from Class 9 labeling for marine pollutants that are not hazardous substances or hazardous wastes, is removed. A corresponding change is made in Column 7 of the HMT to remove Special Provision N50 for the entries ``Environmentally hazardous substance, liquid (or solid) n.o.s.'' Section 172.203 RSPA is removing the requirement in paragraph (j) that the words ``Dangerous When Wet'' be annotated on shipping papers. As discussed previously, RSPA believes that the ``Dangerous When Wet'' hazard is adequately communicated through an indication of the Division 4.3 hazard class as part of the basic description on shipping papers. Commenters uniformly supported this proposal and stated that the change was compatible with international standards and that the ``Dangerous When Wet'' hazard is clearly communicated through indication of Division 4.3 as part of the basic shipping description, emergency response information on the shipping paper, and use of Division 4.3 labels and placards. The list of generic proper shipping names which require inclusion of a technical name in paragraph (k)(3) is amended by adding several entries for hydrocarbon gases, hydrocarbon gas mixtures, and compressed, liquefied or refrigerated gases which have a subsidiary hazard of oxidizer or flammability. In addition, RSPA is adding the entry for ``Organometallic compound, water reactive, flammable, n.o.s.'' which was inadvertently omitted in a previous rulemaking action. As discussed previously in Secs. 171.11, 171.12 and 171.12a, RSPA is adding the word ``Toxic'' and the phrase ``Toxic-Inhalation Hazard'' in paragraph (m)(3) as an alternative to ``Poison''. RSPA proposed the addition of a new paragraph (m)(4) to provide an exception from the requirement to indicate on a shipping paper that a material is toxic if the toxicity of the material is based solely on corrosive destruction of tissue rather than systemic poisoning. One commenter believed this exception should not apply to materials poisonous by inhalation, which require additional shipping paper information to communicate the presence of a fatal inhalation hazard. The commenter believed the proposal was ill conceived and not beneficial to safety. After further consideration, RSPA believes that this proposed exception may not be appropriate for any material meeting toxicity criteria, not just a toxic by inhalation hazard material. Therefore, proposed paragraph (m)(4) is not adopted in this final rule. Part 173 Section 173.3 Paragraph (c)(3) is amended to authorize the word ``SALVAGE'' as an alternative marking for salvage drums. In addition, a new paragraph (c)(7) is added to allow the use of salvage packagings which have been certified and marked to UN standards. RSPA is not adopting other marking requirements specified in the UN Recommendations such as: (1) Adding the letter ``T'' in the package specification markings following the package identification code (e.g. 1A2T/Y300/...); (2) annotating the words ``SALVAGE PACKAGING'' after the basic description on the shipping papers; and (3) adopting salvage packaging performance tests requiring salvage packagings to be tested at the Packing Group II level using liquid as the test medium. It is RSPA's view that [[Page 24695]] additional costs incurred by such marking and performance testing requirements are not justified because salvage packaging provisions currently prescribed in the HMR are adequate. Two commenters addressed proposed changes to this section and both supported RSPA's decision to retain current salvage packaging provisions. For example, the Steel Shipping Container Institute maintained that it could not support complete harmonization with international salvage packaging standards until it has been clearly determined that incidents of failure in salvage packagings meeting the UN standards are less than those meeting current HMR requirements. Section 173.21 The last sentence of paragraph (f) is amended to correctly reference the UN Manual of Tests and Criteria. Section 173.32c Currently an IM portable tank or its compartment having a volume greater than 5000 liters must have a minimum filling density of 80%. RSPA proposed to increase the minimum tank or compartment size to 7500 liters, consistent with international standards. One commenter claimed that RSPA's proposal did not go far enough and indicated that a filling restriction on portable tanks used solely for domestic highway transport is unjustified and precludes shippers from transporting relatively small quantities of hazardous materials in portable tanks. The commenter believed that a filling restriction of less than 80% for IM portable tanks or compartments should not apply to transport by highway. This commenter also stated that the purpose of the ``80% rule'' was to preclude hydraulic surge that could make adequate securing of portable tanks aboard vessels difficult and potentially dangerous, but that surge is not a safety concern in highway transport. RSPA disagrees that surge is not a safety concern in highway transport of IM portable tanks. Portable tanks, when mounted on a vehicle chassis, may have a higher center of gravity as compared to standard cargo tank trucks. The effects of liquid movement and its destabilizing effect at high speed and during abrupt turning can contribute to roll-over. This effect is most predominant when ullage is greater than 20%. Furthermore, it is RSPA's opinion that information supplied by this commenter does not provide sufficient incentive for RSPA to expand relief beyond that proposed in the NPRM. RSPA may consider this matter further in future rulemaking action on the basis of pertinent technical justification (e.g., data indicating forces experienced during transport of portable tanks as a result of cargo surge). Section 173.34 Because of a printing error, in the table in paragraph (e)(18)(i), for DOT 8 or 8AL cylinders used to transport acetylene, under ``Porous filler requalification,'' the year ``2001'' is corrected to read ``2011'. Section 173.60 As proposed, amendments to this section are consistent with the UN Recommendations, are largely
- **truncated:** true
- **body characters:** 260406