Hazardous Materials: Requirements for Maintenance, Requalification, Repair and Use of DOT Specification Cylinders

AGENCY:

Research and Special Programs Administration (RSPA), DOT.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

In this final rule, RSPA is amending the requirements of the Hazardous Materials Regulations applicable to the maintenance, requalification, repair, and use of DOT specification cylinders. In addition, RSPA is adopting changes to revise the requirements for approval of cylinder requalifiers, independent inspection agencies, and non-domestic chemical analysis and tests. Further, RSPA is removing authorization for the manufacture of DOT specification cylinders made with aluminum alloy 6351-T6. This action is being taken to simplify the regulations, respond to petitions for rulemaking, address recommendations of the National Transportation Safety Board, and enhance the safe transportation of hazardous materials in cylinders.

DATES:

Effective Date: October 1, 2002.

Incorporation by Reference Date: The incorporation by reference of publications listed in this final rule has been approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of October 1, 2002.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Cheryl Freeman or Mark Toughiry, (202) 366-4545, Office of Hazardous Materials Technology, Research and Special Programs Administration.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

On October 30, 1998, the Research and Special Programs Administration (RSPA, we) published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) under Docket HM-220 (63 FR 58460). In the NPRM, we proposed to amend the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180) to: (1) Establish four new DOT cylinder specifications to replace the 12 current seamless and welded cylinder specifications; (2) revise the requirements for maintenance, requalification, repair, and use of all DOT specification cylinders; and (3) discontinue the manufacture of certain specification cylinders. We took this action because many of our current cylinder specifications have not been updated since their adoption into the regulations over 50 years ago. The proposed changes were intended to enhance operational controls and transportation safety by incorporating into the HMR new manufacturing and testing technologies and clarifying existing regulatory requirements. In addition, the proposed changes addressed three National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) recommendations for improving the safety of cylinders in transportation. Finally, the proposed changes would have eased the regulatory burden on the regulated industry by incorporating the provisions of more than 30 exemptions into the HMR.

More than 140 commenters submitted over 200 comments in response to the NPRM, including representatives of cylinder and equipment manufacturers, requalifiers, refillers and users, trade associations, gas producers, distributors, shippers, carriers, emergency responders, representatives of federal and state governmental agencies, private consultants, and the general public. In addition, we held a series of public meetings to obtain comments.

Many commenters objected to the proposed new metric-marked cylinder specifications, identified as 3M, 3ALM, 3FM, and 4M. Commenters also opposed the proposed requirement for these new metric-marked cylinders and certain cylinders manufactured to the current specifications, that is, non-metric marked cylinders, to be requalified by ultrasonic examination. These commenters suggested we allow continued manufacture of cylinders to the current DOT specifications and revise the current requirements to include certain enhancements from the metric-marked cylinder proposals. These commenters preferred we wait until after the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) cylinder standards were completed and adopted into the United Nation (UN) Recommendations on the Transport of Dangerous Goods (UN Model Regulations) before we considered incorporating new specification requirements into the HMR. Based on the merits of the comments received, we agree the proposed metric-marked cylinder standards and related proposals that were based on the draft ISO standard should not be adopted. Because of significant opposition to many of the proposals in the 1998 NPRM, we published a notice in the Federal Register on February 13, 2002 (67 FR 6667), terminating rulemaking action under Docket HM-220. The termination notice announced that we were withdrawing the proposals applicable to metric-marked cylinders and ultrasonic examination.

We worked closely with the UN Committee of Experts as it developed an international cylinder standard based on the above-referenced ISO requirements. The new international standard was adopted as part of the UN Model Regulations in December 2000. We will address issues related to the harmonization of the U.S. cylinder regulations with the UN Model Regulations in a future rulemaking. The proposals in the 1998 NPRM relating to maintenance, requalification, repair, and use of DOT specification cylinders and approval of cylinder requalifiers, independent inspection agencies, and non-domestic chemical analyses and tests are addressed in this final rule, which has been designated HM-220D (RSPA-01-10373).

The 1998 NPRM proposed to require all cylinders manufactured or rebuilt to the proposed new metric-marked cylinder specifications to undergo inspection and certification by an Independent Inspection Agency rather than an employee of the manufacturing company. This proposal responded to an NTSB recommendation (I-90-009) that RSPA require independent inspection of new and reconditioned low pressure cylinders consistent with current independent inspection requirements for high pressure cylinders. Because we are not adopting the metric-marked cylinder specifications in this final rule, we are not adopting the proposed independent inspection requirements. However, we will address this issue in a rulemaking to harmonize the U.S. cylinder regulations with the UN Model Regulations that we plan to initiate in the near future.

II. Overview of Changes in this Final Rule

In this final rule, we are amending the HMR to:

(1) Prohibit a filled cylinder with a specified service life from being offered for transportation in commerce after its service life has expired.

(2) Remove authorization for the manufacture of DOT specification cylinders using aluminum alloy 6351-T6. Cylinders manufactured with this aluminum alloy have a greater risk of failure than other aluminum cylinders.

(3) Incorporate by reference new and updated Compressed Gas Association (CGA) standards and updated American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) standards.

(4) Require each person who performs a requalification function that requires marking of an inspection or retest date on a cylinder to have approval from the Associate Administrator for Hazardous Materials Safety (Associate Administrator).

(5) Standardize requirements for repair and rebuilding of DOT-4 series cylinders, other than the DOT 4L.

(6) Allow the application of requalification markings on cylinders by using alternative methods that produce durable, legible marks.

(7) Require pressure relief devices on all DOT-3 series specification cylinders to be set at test pressure with a tolerance of −10% to +0 beginning at the first requalification due on or after the effective date of this final rule.

In addition, we are consolidating requirements for obtaining approval to be a cylinder requalifier, independent inspection agency, or to have chemical tests or analyses performed outside the United States on cylinders manufactured outside the United States in a new Subpart I in Part 107.

The safety of cylinders constructed with aluminum alloy 6351-T6 was first raised in a safety advisory and NPRM published in 1987 under Docket HM-176A. With publication of this final rule, further action under Docket HM-176A is terminated.

III. Section-by-Section Review

The following is a section-by-section review of the changes adopted in this final rule and, where applicable, a discussion of comments received.

Part 107

Section 107.1

This final rule adopts the proposal in the 1998 NPRM to remove the reference to a cylinder retester who is registered pursuant to § 173.34(a)(1) from the definition of “registration.” Commenters did not address this issue.

Subpart I

The 1998 NPRM proposed to add a new subpart I to Part 107 to consolidate procedures currently in §§ 173.34(e)(2), 173.300a, and 173.300b of the HMR for obtaining approval from the Associate Administrator. The approval procedures address requirements for cylinder requalifiers and independent inspection agencies (IIAs), and to have chemical tests or analyses performed outside the United States on DOT specification cylinders manufactured outside the United States. Commenters generally supported this proposal. This final rule adopts the proposed consolidation in Part 107, with the revisions noted below.

Section 107.803

Prescribes application procedures for approval or renewal as an IIA. These procedures permit an approved IIA to perform other functions relating to the cylinder requalification requirements. The criteria permit the approval of any person or organization technically competent to perform cylinder requalification functions and free from undue influence by persons involved with the fabrication, ownership, or movement of the cylinders that the applicant, if approved, would be called upon to evaluate and certify. We are not adopting a proposal to permit persons or organizations approved by foreign governments to perform these functions. This latter proposal was contingent upon our adopting the metric-marked cylinder specifications proposed in the NPRM.

Section 107.805

Sets forth application procedures for a person seeking approval to perform periodic cylinder requalifications. The NPRM proposed to broaden the current approval requirement to apply to any person who performs a requalification function after which the cylinder is required to be marked with a date. The affected requalification functions include visual inspections, pressure tests, repairs, and rebuilding of cylinders. The new approval procedures will enhance the accountability of the cylinder requalification process. This change was supported by most commenters. However, the National Propane Gas Association (NPGA) and some of its members opposed the proposal because it would require persons who perform only visual inspections of cylinders to obtain DOT approval. NPGA stated that this new approval requirement is burdensome, unenforceable, and an excessive response to a safety problem only identifiable through individual instances of egregious cylinder wear. NPGA also said that the proposal could potentially affect tens of thousands of individuals and many small facilities. We disagree. As we stated in the NPRM, this change ensures the accountability of a person performing visual requalifications. In addition, this change provides RSPA with the authority to revoke or suspend a person's approval for demonstrated noncompliance with the requalification requirements. Also, if an applicant must certify it has the ability to perform requalifications, each applicant's awareness of the importance of compliance should be heightened. We estimate the number of affected requalifiers to be 7,200. Under the provisions in this final rule, these requalifers must submit a letter containing information on their qualifications and the location at which they work. The regulatory burden imposed by this new requirement is minimal. Moreover, this final rule includes a transition period of one year to allow sufficient time for affected individuals to obtain the requisite approvals.

As requested by commenters, we are making editorial changes to paragraph (f) to recognize that visual cylinder requalifications are often performed at the owner's or end-user's facility rather than the requalifier's facility.

Because this final rule expands the approval provisions to apply to repairers and rebuilders, we are replacing the terms “retester” and “retester identification number” in this final rule with the terms “requalifier” and “requalifier identification number,” respectively.

Section 107.807

Sets forth the application procedures, currently in § 173.300b, for issuance or renewal of an approval to perform chemical analyses and tests outside the United States on DOT specification cylinders manufactured outside the United States. These procedures are unchanged from current requirements.

Part 171

Section 171.2.

In this final rule, we are adopting the NPRM proposal to revise paragraph (d)(3). The revision clarifies that no person may mark a requalifier identification number (RIN) on a cylinder that has not been requalified according to the applicable requirements.

Section 171.6.

We are revising certain section references in the table of OMB control numbers for consistency with this final rule.

Section 171.7

The NPRM proposed to revise this section to incorporate by reference the latest editions of previously approved CGA Pamphlets and ASTM standards and certain additional ASTM and CGA standards. In this final rule, we are incorporating the 1999 edition of the ASTM standards for tension testing of metallic materials; the 1999 edition of the ASTM standard specification for heat-resisting chromium and chromium-nickel stainless steel plate, sheet, and strip for pressure vessels; and the 1998 edition of the ASTM standards for notched bar impact testing of metallic materials instead of the 1996 editions proposed in the NPRM. We reviewed the more recent editions and identified no significant differences from the 1996 editions. In addition, we are incorporating the 1997 edition of the ASTM standard specification for liquefied petroleum gases (see discussion under “Section 180.203” below). We are also incorporating the 1998 edition of the ASTM standard for ultrasonic examination of metal pipe and tubing instead of the 1993 edition proposed in the NPRM. We reviewed the more recent edition and found no significant differences from the 1993 edition. The ASTM standard for ultrasonic examination replaces a 1967 standard that is no longer available and applies to the manufacture of specification DOT 3T stainless steel cylinders. We are not incorporating the ASTM standards addressing the metric-marked cylinder proposals in the NPRM. Further, we are not incorporating CGA pamphlet C-1, “Methods for Hydrostatic Testing of Compressed Gas Cylinders,” 1996 edition. It is our understanding that CGA is in the process of completely revising the C-1 standard. We will consider incorporating the revised C-1 standard in a future rulemaking.

Section 171.12

As proposed in the NPRM, we are revising paragraph (b)(15) to include a reference to a provision on Canadian manufactured cylinders contained in current § 171.12a(b)(13).

Part 172

Section 172.101

In the § 172.101 Hazardous Materials Table, for the entries “Cyanogen,” “Germane,” and “Iron Pentacarbonyl,” we are revising the references in column (8b) to specify packaging authorization sections consistent with the materials' toxic properties. Commenters did not specifically address this proposal.

Part 173

Section 173.34

We are adopting the changes proposed in the NPRM and supported by most commenters to move the provisions in this section to Subpart I of Part 107, § 173.301, and Subpart B of Part 180, as appropriate, and remove § 173.34. We are removing all references to § 173.34 in the HMR, and replacing them with the appropriate new section references.

Section 173.40

We are adopting the proposed change to paragraph (a) of this section to prohibit the use of DOT 3AL cylinders made of aluminum alloy 6351-T6 for Hazard Zone A materials. The major domestic cylinder manufacturers of DOT 3AL cylinders discontinued using aluminum alloy 6351-T6 in specification cylinders before July 1990. The prohibition on the use of cylinders made of aluminum alloy 6351-T6 for Hazard Zone A materials is effective on October 1, 2002. After that date, cylinders made of aluminum alloy 6351-T6 may not be filled and offered for transportation in toxic inhalation hazard service. In this final rule, we are adding a provision to permit cylinders filled before October 1, 2002, to be offered for transportation and transported to their ultimate destinations until April 1, 2003. When necessary, cylinders containing unused gas may be returned to the filler. Cylinders prohibited for use under this provision are seamless aluminum cylinders marked “DOT 3AL”, including exemption cylinders authorized under exemption numbers DOT-E 6498, 7042, 8107, 8364, and 8422, and composite cylinders authorized under exemption numbers DOT-E 7235, 8023, and 8115.

Several commenters requested we add a table in the HMR to identify all cylinders made of aluminum alloy 6351-T6 by date of manufacture, serial number, manufacturer, etc. We agree that a need exists to identify all affected cylinders. We are making this information available from the Associate Administrator and at our web site Homepage at “hazmat.dot.gov”. Making the information available as a separate document permits greater flexibility in de-listing cylinders removed from hazardous material service.

We are adopting paragraph (b) to include current requirements for outage and pressure in cylinders used for toxic materials. This paragraph was inadvertently omitted from the NPRM.

We are not adopting proposed paragraph (c)(1) to require cylinders containing Hazard Zone A and B materials to meet puncture resistance criteria. A number of commenters opposed the puncture-resistance requirement for Zone B materials. These commenters said that Zone B materials have an excellent safety record in transportation, and that the proposed requirements would pose a significant and unjustified financial burden for transporters of Hazard Zone B materials. Several commenters opposed the proposal to add a puncture-resistance requirement even for Hazard Zone A materials. One commenter noted the NPRM did not include statistics on the incidence of cylinder punctures. Other commenters stated that DOT specification cylinders such as the 3A and 3AA have had excellent safety records for a number of years, and there is no substantial evidence to support the need for puncture-resistance testing. Based on these comments, we are not adopting the proposed puncture-resistance requirements. However, minimum thickness requirements for cylinders used to transport Hazard Zone A or B material remain in effect. Further, this final rule includes a new performance requirement, applicable to all cylinders, for metal attachments to be constructed or protected so as to prevent the likelihood of puncturing or damaging hazardous materials packages transported in the same transport conveyance.

In the NPRM, we sought comments on whether the current Hazard Zone A closure requirements in paragraph (c) should be extended to Hazard Zone B materials. Several commenters opposed such an extension. They said that the change is excessive and unjustified, and would require changing the valving on many cylinders used to transport Hazard Zone B materials. Based on these comments, we are not adopting the Hazard Zone A closure requirements for Hazard Zone B materials in this final rule.

We are adopting new paragraph (d) to specify cylinder valve protection requirements for Hazard Zone A and B materials. None of the commenters opposed extending the valve protection requirements to Hazard Zone B materials. Indeed, one commenter stated its company is currently shipping both Hazard Zone A and B materials in cylinders conforming to the current valve protection drop test requirement for Hazard Zone A materials. In this final rule, we are revising the valve protection requirements to require that when a protective cap is used, it must be made of metal. This change responds to a commenter who pointed out that current § 173.301(h)(2)(i) provides for equipping a cylinder with a securely attached metal cap. The commenter stated that nonmetallic caps should not be permitted under § 173.40. We agree, and have included the change.

Several commenters suggested the protection device should be designed to protect against leakage in the event of valve deformation rather than to prevent deformation or breakage of the valve. We disagree. A deformed or broken valve presents a potential safety hazard that could affect the integrity of the cylinder. One commenter asked for a better definition of the term “deformation.” In this context, “deformation” means a valve that is bent, distorted, mangled, misshapen, twisted, warped, or in a similar condition. We have added a definition of “deformation” in this final rule.

A commenter asked us to revise the drop height requirement from 2 meters (6.5 feet) to 1.2 meters (4 feet) for consistency with ISO Standard 11117 (Gas Cylinders—Valve Protection Caps and Valve Guards for Industrial and Medical Gas Cylinders—Design, Construction, and Tests). We disagree. Because these cylinders are used to transport Division 2.3 materials in Hazard Zone A or B, they must be able to survive severe handling and abuse without leakage of contents. Therefore, a more stringent drop test requirement is warranted. Further, the ISO Standard 11117 drop test requires the cylinder to be filled with water, while the drop test adopted in this final rule requires the cylinder to be empty. Since the tests are conducted under different conditions, the drop heights must be different to assure meaningful test results.

We are adopting paragraph (e), which restates the current prohibition against manifolding or interconnecting cylinders containing toxic materials.

Section 173.115

As proposed in the NPRM, this section permits LC50 values for mixtures to be determined using CGA pamphlet P-20 and adds a definition for “refrigerant or dispersant gas.”

Section 173.163

A number of commenters opposed the proposal in the NPRM to require cylinders used for hydrogen fluoride to be requalified by ultrasonic examination only. They said that there is no safety justification for the proposal, and it will significantly increase costs for the regulated industry. Commenters noted that ultrasonic examination requires sophisticated equipment and highly trained personnel. They expressed concern that retest facilities do not have infrastructure in place to accommodate the proposed examination procedures. Because of commenter concerns, we are not adopting the ultrasonic examination proposal in this final rule. We are retaining the current requirement for an external visual inspection in place of the hydrostatic test and internal visual inspection. We will continue to permit the use of ultrasonic examination under the exemption program. Issues related to ultrasonic testing will be addressed in a subsequent rulemaking.

Section 173.192

We are revising the section title to reflect that the requirements in this section apply only to Hazard Zone A gases, as proposed. In addition, we are extending the current restriction in § 173.192(a)(3), which limits transportation of DOT 3AL cylinders in arsine and phosphine service to highway and rail, to include all Hazard Zone A gases. Thus, Hazard Zone A gases in 3AL cylinders may only be transported by highway or rail. CGA and another commenter requested that we authorize transportation of DOT 3AL cylinders by vessel and by cargo aircraft. CGA stated that prohibiting such transportation places U.S. companies at an economic disadvantage in the world market. We have some reservations about the CGA comment. Aluminum undergoes a marked reduction in tensile strength when subjected to high temperatures. This occurs at much lower temperatures than for steel cylinders. The potential consequences of a fire on board a vessel or aircraft are more serious than a fire occurring on a truck or rail car. The release of toxic vapors in the confined space of a vessel hold or cargo aircraft compartment could have significant adverse consequences. However, on August 30, 2001, we issued an exemption (DOT-E-12339) that permits the transportation by cargo vessel of DOT 3AL cylinders (6061 aluminum alloy) containing various Division 2.1 and 2.3 gases. The cylinders must be contained inside steel freight containers. We will evaluate the safety record of cylinders transported on cargo vessels under this exemption, and consider incorporating its terms into a regulation of general applicability in a future rulemaking.

Also, we are revising paragraph (c), as proposed, to permit the use of alternative leakage tests having equivalent levels of sensitivity as the current water bath leakage test, upon written approval from the Associate Administrator. Currently, paragraph (c) requires a cylinder containing any amount of phosgene gas to be subjected to a water bath leakage test before it is offered for transportation. CGA noted that the water bath test is conducted at 150° F, and the normal filling densities and liquid full conditions for phosgene cylinders are based on 130° F. For this reason, CGA suggested that we should add a precautionary statement to warn persons that a cylinder filled to 125% of capacity could experience an overfill condition when it is heated to 150° F. Alternatively, CGA suggested the water bath test should be conducted at 130° F. We disagree. The water bath requirements for phosgene cylinders are long-standing regulatory requirements. However, to accommodate CGA's concerns, we are adding a precautionary safety statement to alert requalifiers.

Section 173.198

We are making a minor editorial change to paragraph (a).

Section 173.226

Currently, Division 6.1, Hazard Zone A materials may be shipped in any DOT specification cylinder, except DOT 8, 8AL, and 39. The NPRM proposed a revision to paragraph (a) to permit materials that are poisonous by inhalation (PIH materials) in Hazard Zone A to be transported only in seamless specification cylinders conforming to the requirements of § 173.40. A commenter requested that we continue to permit the use of welded cylinders for PIH materials. We disagree. Because of the inherent risk involved in the transportation of PIH materials, they should only be permitted in cylinders providing the highest level of safety. Therefore, this final rule adopts the change as proposed in the NPRM. This change also provides consistency in packaging assignments with current § 173.192, which authorizes only seamless specification cylinders for Packing Group I materials.

Section 173.227

We are adopting the proposal in the NPRM to revise paragraph (a). The revision authorizes only seamless and welded specification cylinders conforming to the requirements in § 173.40 for transportation of PIH materials in Hazard Zone B.

Section 173.228

As proposed in the NPRM, we are revising paragraph (a) to require bromine pentafluoride and bromine trifluoride, which are Hazard Zone A materials, to be transported only in seamless specification cylinders that conform to the requirements in § 173.40.

Sections 173.300a-173.300c

We are moving the provisions contained in these sections to new Subpart I of Part 107. We are deleting §§ 173.300a, 173.300b, and 173.300c.

Sections 173.301-173.301b

We are revising § 173.301 to specify the general shipper requirements for the use of specification cylinders. These requirements include general prefill requirements, maintenance and legibility of markings, pressure relief devices (PRDs), valve protection, manifolding of cylinders, and charging of foreign cylinders. We are removing the cargo tank manifolding requirements currently in § 173.301(d), and placing them with other cargo tank requirements in § 173.315. A derivation table showing the relocation of the requirements appeared in Part X of the preamble in the NPRM.

Paragraph (a) includes general cylinder qualification requirements. We are revising the wording in paragraph (a)(2) in response to several commenters who stated the proposed wording implied that defective PRDs could be repaired. This was not our intent. The wording is revised to state that, in some cases, the cylinder may be repaired and requalified if the work is performed according to Part 180.

In the NPRM, we proposed to place in paragraph (a)(4) a current provision authorizing the use of a cylinder with a higher marked pressure limit when a cylinder of the same specification, but a lower marked pressure limit, is prescribed. We proposed no change to the wording. A commenter suggested that, when a cylinder with a higher marked pressure limit is used for Division 2.2 gases, the PRD setting should be based on the lowest acceptable test pressure of the cylinder for the particular gas service. We disagree. This is a long-standing regulatory requirement with a demonstrated safety benefit. If a higher pressure cylinder is chosen for a particular service, another user may not be aware the PRD setting has been lowered. If the cylinder were over-heated or over-pressurized, a premature release of product could result.

We are making a minor editorial change in the second sentence of paragraph (a)(5). The sentence in the NPRM stated “This requirement does not apply to a cylinder filled before the requalification due date”. In response to a comment, the sentence is revised for clarification to read “This prohibition does not apply * * *” Another commenter suggested the first sentence should be revised to read “No person may fill a cylinder overdue for periodic requalification with a hazardous material.” We disagree. HMR requirements for filling a cylinder do not apply unless the cylinder is offered for transportation.

We are revising paragraph (a)(6), as proposed, to prohibit the offering for transportation and transportation in commerce of a filled cylinder after its specified service life has expired. For example, DOT 3HT cylinders would be prohibited from transportation 24 years after the date of the original test or 4,380 pressurizations, whichever occurs first (see current § 173.34(e)(15)(ii)(C)). Similarly, aluminum lined, hoop wrapped, and fiber reinforced plastic composite cylinders would be prohibited from transportation after 15 years. Several commenters requested a revision to allow the transportation of affected non-leaking cylinders for reprocessing or disposing of the cylinder contents. Another commenter requested we require the cylinders to be stamped as condemned or be rendered unserviceable when the authorized service life has expired. We agree, and have adopted the suggested changes in this final rule.

We are revising the wording in proposed paragraph (a)(7) to prohibit the pressure of the hazardous material at 55° C (131° F) from exceeding 5/4 of the service pressure of the cylinder. Commenters pointed out the “5/4” was omitted from the text in the NPRM. This was an oversight. We have corrected the text in this final rule.

Paragraph (b) sets forth requirements for cylinder markings and is adopted as proposed in the NPRM.

Paragraph (c) specifies requirements for toxic gases and mixtures and is adopted as proposed in the NPRM.

Paragraph (d) addresses gases capable of combining chemically. In this final rule, we are prohibiting the use of DOT 3AL cylinders made of aluminum alloy 6351-T6 for gases having pyrophoric properties. Commenters requested we allow time for transporting the affected cylinders for reprocessing or disposal of the cylinder's contents. We agree time should be provided for transporting the cylinders. We are providing a transition period of six months after the effective date of the final rule to provide for transportation of cylinders filled before the effective date of the final rule.

As proposed in the NPRM, we are adopting paragraph (e). This paragraph restates the current requirement to prohibit a cylinder from being offered for transportation unless it was filled by the cylinder owner or with the owner's consent.

Paragraph (f) sets forth requirements for PRDs. The NPRM restated the current provision in § 173.34(d) to require a cylinder filled with gas and transported in commerce to be equipped with one or more PRDs sized and selected in accordance with CGA Pamphlets S-1.1 and S-7. Compliance with paragraph 9.1.1.1 of CGA Pamphlet S-1.1, which requires periodic replacement of a PRD, is not required. Several commenters objected to this provision, stating compliance with paragraph 9.1.1.1 should be mandatory. These commenters cited data generated by Transport Canada and industry tests that suggest a large percentage of PRDs fail to operate as designed. As we stated in the 1998 NPRM (63 FR 58465), we have previously proposed voluntary compliance with paragraph 9.1.1.1 of CGA Pamphlet S-1.1. Commenters generally opposed this proposal, citing its cost and the lack of incident data justifying the requirement. In the NPRM, we asked for data and comments on the cost, effectiveness, and need for adopting paragraph 9.1.1.1. Commenters did not provide specific information. Therefore, we are not adopting paragraph 9.1.1.1 at this time. However, we will examine this issue in a future rulemaking, as necessary.

We are revising the wording in proposed paragraph (f)(2) that would have required a PRD, when installed, to be in the vapor space of the cylinder. Several commenters objected to requiring the PRD to be in the vapor space of a cylinder containing liquefied Division 2.2 gases. They stated the proposal would require valve redesign at substantial costs and would be ineffective in tube trailers and other cylinders loaded in horizontal positions. The commenters suggested we revise the provision to require the PRD to be “in communication with the vapor space.” We agree. The paragraph is revised to require the inlet port to the relief channel to be in the vapor space of the cylinder.

We also are revising the wording of proposed paragraph (f)(3) that would have required the pressure relief setting (the start-to-discharge or ruptured pressure) of a PRD for DOT-3 series cylinders to be not less than the minimum designed test pressure. In the NPRM, the proposed allowable tolerances for these PRDs were minus zero to plus 10%. Many commenters were concerned about the cost of producing PRDs with tolerances of minus zero to plus 10%. They stated that the proposed amendment would necessitate retrofitting many cylinders with new PRDs. Several commenters reiterated that CGA Pamphlet S-1.1 stipulates a maximum burst pressure for a disk as minus 10% to zero of test pressure. They stated that we provided no justification for requiring a cylinder pressure greater than the cylinder's specified test pressure. They also suggested that, in some situations, a shipper may want a cylinder to be fitted with a PRD that will function at a pressure much lower than the test pressure of the cylinder.

Considering the comments received, we believe a setting of 100% of test pressure, with an allowable tolerance of minus 10% to plus zero of its setting for a PRD, is appropriate. This will provide a reasonable balance between keeping a gas in a cylinder and preventing the cylinder from rupturing in case of a fire or overfill. PRDs designed to release at not less than test pressure, within the allowable tolerance, will eliminate the possibility of gas release through the relief device at a temperature less than or equal to 54° C (130° F). At the same conditions and test pressure, the safety factor for cylinder rupture is 1.6. It is our understanding, based on discussions with gas distributors, that many major gas distributors using DOT-3 series cylinders are currently setting the PRDs at 90-100% of test pressure for toxic and flammable gases. Because it is common practice for many shippers of DOT-3 series cylinders to replace the PRD at the time of a cylinder's requalification, we believe this final rule will result in minimal incremental cost. Further, for most gases, the increased PRD setting will not significantly affect the performance of cylinders in bonfire tests. To allow users sufficient time to modify cylinders to meet the new PRD settings, we are providing that each cylinder must be brought into conformance at the first requalification of the cylinder after the effective date of this final rule.

We are not adopting the change in proposed paragraph (f)(4) that would have required a PRD to be visually inspected for damage before filling the cylinder. We agree with commenters who stated that a visual inspection of the PRD will not detect defects associated with internal components and their ability to function. Neither are we adopting proposed paragraph (f)(5) that would have required a cylinder filling facility to test a PRD for leaks before offering a filled cylinder for transportation. Rather, we are adding a new subparagraph to paragraph (a) to include the long-standing regulatory requirement, currently in § 173.34(d), that safety relief devices must be tested for leaks before the filled cylinder is transported. We are also adding language pertaining to repair of leaking fuse plug devices, also currently in § 173.34(d), that was inadvertently omitted in the NPRM. In addition, several commenters suggested revising the wording to prohibit a cylinder with a leaking PRD from being offered for transportation. We agree with the commenters. We have included a restriction on leaking PRDs in paragraph (a)(2) of this final rule.

We are correcting the wording that appeared in proposed paragraph (f)(6)(i)(B), adopted as paragraph (f)(5)(i)(B) in this final rule, to state that a PRD is not required on a cylinder of 305 mm (12 inches) or less in length and 114 mm (4.5 inches) or less in outside diameter. However, if the cylinder is filled with a nonliquefied gas to a pressure of 1800 psig or higher, then it must have a PRD.

Paragraph (g) specifies requirements for manifolding cylinders in transportation. We are revising the wording in proposed paragraph (g)(1) that would have required the PRD on manifolded cylinders containing any compressed gas to be arranged to discharge upward and unobstructed to the open air. Our intent for expanding the original requirement in the HMR from flammable gases to all compressed gases was to protect personnel and adjacent cylinders from gases released due to a PRD function. Upon further consideration, we agree with commenters that the need for PRDs to discharge upward is more crucial for horizontal cylinders containing flammable gases. Discharges of flammable gases could result in flame impingement on personnel or adjacent cylinders. We agree the requirement is not necessary on cylinders containing nonflammable gases or on vertical cylinders. We revised the final rule to reflect these changes.

Commenters were also concerned with the wording in proposed paragraph (g)(1)—“equivalent valve protection required in § 173.301(h).” These comments said that the wording implies that manifolded cylinders must be drop tested in the manifolded configuration. This was not our intent. Therefore, we are revising the wording to specify that valves and PRDs must be protected by framing, a cabinet, or other method.

Paragraph (h) contains cylinder valve protection requirements. The requirements adopted in this final rule prescribe a performance-oriented approach to valve assembly protection. The requirements include a drop test to verify the performance of valve protection devices. In response to commenters, we are revising paragraph (h)(1) to grant an exception from the valve assembly protection requirements for cylinders used as fire extinguishers, acetylene MC cylinders, and Medical E styles with a water capacity of 300 in³ or less.

Several commenters also suggested that the drop test should be performed at 2 m (6.5 ft) instead of 1.8 m (6 ft) for consistency with the 2 m (6.5 ft) puncture resistance requirement in § 173.40. We disagree. We are prescribing a 6-foot drop test for consistency with performance requirements adopted for cylinders by the UN Committee of Experts on the Transport of Dangerous Goods. The final rule provides a transition period of five years, until October 1, 2007, for cylinders to be brought into conformance with this requirement. In this final rule, we are revising the language proposed in the NPRM to clarify that cylinders manufactured before October 1, 2007, must conform to current valve protection requirements.

The Chlorine Institute stated that tracking protective valve hoods to make sure they are used on the type of cylinder on which they were tested is unrealistic. The Chlorine Institute said hoods are frequently interchanged with others on cylinders in the same type of service and suggested that a valve hood that has been tested on at least one cylinder specified for a particular gas should be accepted for use with the manufacturer's other cylinders in the same or lower net weight service. We recognize that protective caps and hoods may be interchanged among cylinders. However, we are concerned that different protective hoods may not provide the same level of protection. If cylinder hoods and caps are interchanged among different cylinders, each must provide an equivalent level of safety to the performance standard specified in this final rule.

Paragraph (i) addresses cylinders mounted on motor vehicles or in frames. In the NPRM, we proposed revisions to clarify the following points: (1) Any DOT specification cylinder over 6.5 meters transported in container-on-flat-car (COFC) or trailer-on-flat-car (TOFC) service by rail must be transported under conditions approved by the FRA; (2) the force the valve and PRD must withstand is equal to twice the weight of the cylinder and the framework assembly; and (3) a discharge of any compressed gas from the PRD must not contact personnel or adjacent cylinders. CGA requested we revise paragraph (i) to: (1) Provide examples of protective structure, such as rear bumpers, frame rails, and bulkheads; (2) add a detailed description of the forces involved in a road accident (static compressive longitudinal force, parallel to the ground, equal to twice the weight of the loaded tube trailer); and (3) add language describing the latest technology in front safety design for tube trailers. CGA stated that an in-tube safety device has the burst disc inside the neck of the tube. Therefore, if a front end collision occurs, the safety device will not be sheared off, and product will not be discharged. The clarifications proposed in the NPRM in paragraph (i) primarily address service by rail. We agree with CGA that requirements for cylinders transported horizontally by road (DOT 3T and DOT 3AX and 3AAX cylinders configured as tube trailers) may need to be updated. However, that issue is beyond the scope of this rulemaking. We will address this issue in a future rulemaking.

Paragraph (j) prohibits filled non-DOT specification cylinders, except for certain foreign cylinders, from being transported in the United States. Two commenters asked us to revise paragraph (j) to specifically permit transportation of non-specification cylinders used as fire extinguishers in accordance with § 173.309. We agree, and have revised paragraph (j) accordingly.

Paragraph (k) specifies requirements for transportation of foreign cylinders within a single port area. A commenter suggested we define a single port area as a distance of 360 miles from any port. That issue is beyond the scope of this rulemaking. The U.S. Coast Guard expressed concern that this proposal would impose a greater burden on cylinders intended to be filled in the United States and shipped for export only. The Coast Guard stated that the inflatable life raft servicing industry relies on this provision to transport foreign cylinders taken from foreign flag vessels to and from servicing industries. The provision referenced by the Coast Guard is adopted as paragraph (l) in this final rule, with no change from current requirements. Further, we issued an exemption on December 31, 2001, to authorize non-specification cylinders used in self-inflating life-saving appliances to be transported between a vessel and a USCG-approved servicing facility.

Another commenter opposed the proposal in the NPRM that foreign cylinders transported within a single port area must be transported in a closed freight container. This commenter stated that such foreign cylinders must be certified by the importer to provide an equivalent level of safety as DOT specification cylinders. For this reason, there is no need to require their transportation in a closed freight container. We disagree. The requirement is intended to reduce the possibility a foreign cylinder may inadvertently be included in a load of DOT-authorized cylinders. The European Industrial Gases Association urged us to allow the use in the United States of cylinders of foreign origin that have been approved for use in Europe by the European Conference of Ministers of Transport. This issue is beyond the scope of this rulemaking. However, we may consider it in a future action.

As proposed in the NPRM, we are adopting paragraph (l), which restates the current requirements for filling foreign cylinders for export.

Paragraph (m) proposed to prohibit the use of metal cylinder attachments with sharp features that may cause damage to other packages. This proposal responds to NTSB Recommendation I-92-001, which urges RSPA to require attachments to DOT hazardous materials packagings to be designed to minimize the risk of puncturing other hazardous materials packagings. Several commenters expressed confusion as to the meaning of the term “sharp” as used in the NPRM. They stated that the term is vague and not based on any objective measure. They also said that it is impossible to guarantee that any corner, edge, or other feature cannot cause damage to other freight. Commenters were also concerned that variations on how other freight is packaged, the other freight's susceptibility to impact damage, the vehicle speed, and the vehicle acceleration and deceleration speeds make it impossible to evaluate a cylinder attachment's performance in transportation. We agree it may not be possible to prevent a corner, edge, or other feature of a cylinder attachment from damaging other freight in an accident. However, we believe attachments can be designed to minimize potential damage. In response to comments, the provision in this final rule is written as a performance standard.

Section 173.301a

We are adopting, as proposed, this new section containing the current requirements for the pressure in a cylinder at 70° F and 130° F and a grandfather provision currently in § 173.34(b).

Section 173.302

We are adopting this section containing general requirements for filling specification cylinders with a nonliquefied (permanent) compressed gas. Paragraph (a) sets forth general requirements for transporting a cylinder filled with a nonliquefied compressed gas. It is adopted as proposed in the NPRM.

Paragraph (b) specifies requirements for aluminum cylinders in oxygen service. We are revising proposed paragraph (b)(1) to require an aluminum cylinder in oxygen service to be equipped with brass or stainless steel valves only. A commenter noted the valves on many medical oxygen cylinders are chrome-plated in areas that do not come into contact with the oxygen. Our intent is to prevent oxygen from coming into contact with an aluminum valve having internal rubbing or abrading aluminum parts. Therefore, we are revising proposed paragraph (b)(1) to require any portion of the valve that contacts the oxygen in the cylinder to be made of brass or stainless steel.

Several commenters pointed out that proposed paragraph (b)(3) cites former Federal specification RR-C-901b and not the current RR-C-901C. The paragraph cites are corrected in this final rule.

Paragraph (c) addresses cylinders containing oxygen that is continuously fed to fish tanks. It is adopted as proposed in the NPRM.

Paragraph (d) permits shipment of Division 2.1 materials in aluminum cylinders only when transported by highway, rail, or cargo-only aircraft. A commenter requested we revise paragraph (d) to authorize the transportation of specification aluminum cylinders containing Division 2.1 gases by vessel. As stated above in the preamble discussion for § 173.192, we will evaluate the safety record of cylinders transported on cargo vessels under an exemption issued on August 30, 2001. We will consider incorporating the terms of this exemption into a regulation of general applicability if the safety record indicates that such incorporation is appropriate.

Another commenter suggested there is no scientific rationale for limiting the transportation of Division 2.1 materials in aluminum cylinders to cargo-only aircraft. As we have previously explained, a cylinder must be able to withstand fire without rupture for at least 90 minutes to enable an aircraft to reach the nearest airport and land safely in the event of an emergency. Heat exposure such as a pressurized aluminum cylinder would experience in a fire would cause the cylinder to burst well before 90 minutes had elapsed and possibly disable the aircraft.

Section 173.302a

In this final rule, we are adopting this new section specifying requirements for filling a cylinder with a nonliquefied compressed gas.

Paragraph (a) sets forth detailed filling requirements. A commenter requested we revise the filling requirement applicable to flammable gases in DOT 39 cylinders. Current § 173.302(a)(4) says that, for DOT 39 cylinders used to transport flammable gas, the “internal volume may not exceed 75 cubic inches.” The commenter suggested that, as currently written, it is not clear whether the term “internal volume” refers to the amount of gas permitted in the cylinder or the total capacity of the cylinder. We agree. The volume limitation is intended to apply to a cylinder's internal volume. In this final rule, we revised paragraph (a)(3) to clarify that the restriction applies to a cylinder's internal volume.

Paragraph (b) specifies special filling limits for DOT 3A, 3AX, 3AA, 3AAX, and 3T cylinders. We are adopting paragraph (b)(3)(iv), as proposed, to provide for a cylinder's average wall stress calculation to be determined through computation of the rejection elastic expansion limit (REE) in accordance with CGA Pamphlet C-5, or through the use of the manufacturer's marked REE on the cylinder. A commenter requested that we also allow the use of the standard calculated values listed in CGA Pamphlet C-5 or the use of a previously determined REE marked on the cylinder. It was not our intent to prevent use of standard calculated values listed in CGA Pamphlet C-5. In this final rule, we revised the wording to authorize the use of these values. However, we are not authorizing the use of an REE marking applied to the cylinder by a person other than the manufacturer because it may be inaccurate.

Paragraph (c) prescribes requirements for carbon monoxide. In response to a CGA petition (P-1082), we are removing the 5/6 filling pressure limitation for DOT 3AL cylinders in carbon monoxide service. CGA furnished information to support its conclusion that, although evidence shows carbon monoxide can cause stress corrosion cracking in steel cylinders, there is no evidence carbon monoxide causes corrosion cracking or carbonyl formation in aluminum cylinders. We agree with CGA, and are permitting a DOT 3AL cylinder to be filled to its marked service pressure when used for carbon monoxide. We also modified the paragraph to indicate that the 5/6 pressure limitation applies to steel cylinders.

Paragraph (d) sets forth requirements for diborane and diborane mixtures. It is adopted as proposed in the NPRM.

Section 173.304

This section specifies filling requirements for cylinders used to transport liquefied compressed gas. With minor editorial revisions, it is revised as proposed in the NPRM.

Section 173.304a

This new section, proposed in the NPRM, addresses additional requirements for transporting liquefied compressed gases in specification cylinders. Paragraph (a) specifies detailed filling requirements for a number of gases, including a table of maximum filling densities. As requested by commenters, this section is revised in the final rule to add DOT 3AL cylinders to the authorized list of cylinders. We inadvertently omitted the DOT 3AL reference from the NPRM.

In paragraph (a)(3), the NPRM proposed extending the provision limiting cylinder volume to 75 cubic inches, which currently applies to liquefied petroleum gas and Division 2.1 materials listed in the § 173.304 table, to all Division 2.1 materials. One commenter suggested this proposal would have a negative impact on companies using DOT 39 cylinders larger than 75 cubic inches in aerosol applications. We plan to address issues related to requirements for all cylinders used in aerosol applications in a future rulemaking. This rulemaking will harmonize, to the extent possible, the U.S. cylinder regulations with international regulations recently adopted by the UN Committee of Experts on the Transport of Dangerous Goods. Therefore, in this final rule, we are not adopting paragraph (a)(3) as proposed. We will address filling limits for liquefied compresses gases and Division 2.1 materials in a future rulemaking.

Paragraph (b) is reserved.

Paragraph (c) establishes requirements for verifying a cylinder's contents and is adopted as proposed in the NPRM.

Paragraph (d) specifies filling requirements for liquefied petroleum gas and is adopted as proposed in the NPRM. One commenter requested a change to the filling densities. The request is beyond the scope of this rulemaking. It will be considered under a separate rulemaking.

Paragraph (e) sets forth requirements for carbon dioxide, refrigerated liquid, and nitrous oxide, refrigerated liquid. It is adopted as proposed in the NPRM.

Section 173.305

This section is revised as proposed in the NPRM to add a reference to § 173.301 to paragraph (b).

Section 173.306

This section is revised as proposed in the NPRM to change the reference for overpack requirements.

Section 173.315

Consistent with the NPRM, this final rule adds paragraph (q) to this section. Paragraph (q) specifies conditions under which cargo tanks containing anhydrous ammonia may be manifolded.

Section 173.334

This section establishes requirements for organic phosphates mixed with compressed gas. In this final rule, this section is amended as proposed, except we are not adopting the proposed metric-marked cylinder provisions.

Section 173.336

This section sets forth requirements for nitrogen dioxide, liquefied, and dinitrogen tetroxide, liquefied and is amended, as proposed, except we are not adopting the proposed metric-marked cylinder provisions. We are correcting the referenced Federal Specification RR-C-901C paragraph cites.

Section 173.337

This section prescribes requirements for nitric oxide and is amended, as proposed, except we are not adopting the proposed metric-marked cylinder provisions. We are correcting the referenced Federal Specification RR-C-901C paragraph cites and adding a reference to § 173.40 in the introductory paragraph that was inadvertently omitted in the NPRM.

Part 177

Section 177.840

We are revising current paragraph (a)(1) to allow horizontal loading of cylinders containing Class 2 materials if the cylinders are designed so the inlet to the PRD is located in the vapor space. The cylinders must be properly secured during transportation.

We had proposed to require the use of cylinder restraint systems to reduce the likelihood of cylinders being ejected from a vehicle in the case of an accident. We issued this proposal in response to NTSB Recommendation I-90-008, which urges RSPA to require hazardous materials packages to be secured with adequate cargo restraint systems to prevent their ejection from the vehicle during transportation.

Considering the wide variation in cylinder sizes, and the various types of restraints that would be required, we solicited information in the NPRM on the NTSB recommendation. We asked commenters to address anticipated safety benefits and the costs of requiring the use of restraint systems, particularly on small businesses. Numerous commenters objected to the proposed amendment. They stated it is common practice to secure carbon dioxide and other Division 2.2 gases in horizontal positions. NPGA requested that we allow Class 2 gases to be loaded in a horizontal position if the cylinder is designed so the inlet to the PRD is located in the vapor space. We agree with NPGA that the inlet port must be in the vapor space.

Several commenters also objected to our usage of the word “lash.” This term appears in the current regulations, and we have received no previous requests for a revision. The commenters stated that lashing should be considered an appropriate means of securing cylinders, but should not be made a prescriptive requirement. One commenter asked us to remove the wording “and securely attached to motor vehicle.” The commenter stated that thousands of low-pressure cylinders containing nonliquefied gases are shipped on stretch-wrapped pallets. The commenter said requiring such pallets to be securely attached to a motor vehicle would be overly burdensome, costly to the regulated industry and consumers, and would provide no added safety benefits.

We reviewed the HM-220 comments and considered the wide range of packaging configurations and sizes that may be loaded on a vehicle. We find it neither practicable nor cost-beneficial to require carriers to secure each hazardous material package on a vehicle in a manner that will withstand every conceivable accident or overturn situation. The current regulations require hazardous materials packages containing Class 2 (gases), Class 3 (flammable liquid), Division 6.1 (toxic), Class 7 (radioactive), or Class 8 (corrosive) materials to be secured against movement within the vehicle under conditions normally incident to transportation. We believe this standard provides an acceptable level of safety. However, we recognize the requirement should be broadened to include all hazardous materials packages rather than limited to hazardous materials of certain hazard classes. We will propose these changes in a future rulemaking.

Part 178

Section 178.35

This section establishes general requirements for cylinders. We are revising paragraph (c)(3)(iv) to reference a new Appendix C, which provides illustrations of recommended locations for selecting test specimens from welded cylinders. In the NPRM, we proposed the use of Appendix C for metric-marked welded cylinders. Although commenters opposed adoption of the metric-marked cylinder proposals, they requested that we include the appendix as guidance of use with non-metric-marked cylinders.

We are revising paragraph (d) of this section to set forth requirements, established elsewhere in this final rule, applicable to specification cylinders. A cylinder may not be constructed of material having seams, cracks or laminations or other defects, and metal attachments must be constructed to prevent the possibility of puncturing or damaging other hazardous materials packages.

We are revising paragraph (f), as proposed in the NPRM, to except DOT 3E cylinders from the requirement to be marked with an inspector's mark or serial number.

Section 178.45

We are revising paragraph (h) to update an old incorporation by reference.

Section 178.46

This section prescribes requirements for DOT 3AL seamless cylinders. This final rule revises the tables in paragraph (b)(4) to remove aluminum alloy 6351-T6 as an authorized material for the manufacture of DOT 3AL seamless cylinders. In addition, in Table 1, this final rule makes several changes to the chemical composition limits for 6061 alloy for consistency with limits stated in The Aluminum Association Standards and Data, 1993 edition. The currently stated silicon (Si) maximum of 0.80% is revised to read 0.8%, the currently stated iron (Fe) maximum of 0.70% is revised to read 0.7%, the currently stated magnesium (Mg) minimum of 0.80% is revised to read 0.8%, and the currently stated Mg maximum of 1.20% is revised to read 1.2%. Finally, the currently stated Table 1 limit of 0.01 for the chemical composition of lead (Pb) and bismuth (Bi) is changed to 0.005.

Appendix to Subpart C of Part 178

We are adopting an appendix containing illustrations of the recommended locations for taking test specimens for specific welded cylinder designs.

Part 180

Part 180, Subpart C

We are adopting a new subpart to specify requirements for the continuing qualification, maintenance, repair, and rebuilding of DOT specification and exemption cylinders. Most of the requirements are currently contained in §§ 173.34 and 173.301.

Section 180.201

This section lists the entities to which Subpart C applies and is adopted as proposed in the NPRM.

Section 180.203

This section contains definitions for terms used throughout Subpart C.

We are adopting the definition of “commercially free of corrosive components” as proposed in the NPRM. CGA and several other commenters requested we revise the wording to read “a hazardous material having a moisture pressure dew point at or below * * *” They stated the change would recognize water as the contaminant at service pressure. NPGA stated propane has a dew point of −42.2° C (−44° F). NPGA noted that ASTM D-1835 “Standard Specification for Liquefied Petroleum (LP) Gases” incorporates provisions to control moisture content and the level of corrosive sulfur compounds in propane. NPGA urged us to adopt the moisture content criteria contained in the ASTM standard. We agree an exception from hydrostatic test requirements should be granted for cylinders used exclusively for the transportation of petroleum gas that is essentially free of moisture and corroding components. We are revising the table in § 180.209(g) accordingly.

We are adopting the definitions of “condemn,” “defect,” and “elastic expansion,” as proposed in the NPRM.

The NPRM proposed a definition for “filled.” A commenter stated the words “charged” and “filled” are used interchangeably in Part 173 of the HMR and suggested we add the wording “(or charged)” following the word “filled.” We agree; this final rule adopts a definition for “filled or charged.”

We are adopting the definition of “non-corrosive service” as proposed in the NPRM, revised slightly for clarity.

We had proposed to define the term “over-heated” to mean a condition in which any part of a cylinder has been subjected to a temperature in excess of 176° C (350° F). Several commenters noted a temperature of 176° C (350° F) is conservatively low for steel. They requested we reference a temperature of 176° C (350° F) for aluminum and 343° C (650° F) for nickel or steel. We agree, and revised the definition accordingly in this final rule. In addition, we revised the definition to indicate that a cylinder is over-heated if the temperature of any portion of the cylinder reaches the specified temperatures. This change responds to the concerns expressed by firefighters discussed below under § 180.205.

We had proposed to define the term “over-pressurized” to mean a condition in which a cylinder has been subjected to an internal pressure in excess of 30% of its test pressure. This definition was intended to apply to the pressure to which a cylinder may be subjected during requalification testing, not to a cylinder's service pressure or to pressure during normal transportation operations. Since publication of the NPRM, we have determined that a single definition for “over-pressurized” that would apply to all cylinders is not practicable. Pressure limits may vary depending on the design specification of the cylinder, its material of construction, and the material transported. Therefore, we are not adopting the proposed definition in this final rule. Persons who use cylinders to transport hazardous materials in commerce should be aware that a cylinder subjected to pressures beyond its design capability may be rendered unfit for continued service. Any person in possession of an over-pressurized cylinder must determine the cylinder's suitability for continued use prior to offering the cylinder for transportation in commerce.

We are adopting the definitions for “permanent expansion,” “proof pressure test,” “rebuild,” “rejected cylinder,” “repair,” “requalification,” “requalification identification number or RIN,” “test pressure,” “total expansion,” “visual inspection,” and “volumetric expansion test” as proposed in the NPRM.

Section 180.205

This section prescribes general requirements for the continuing qualification and use of cylinders and for persons who perform cylinder requalification functions. Paragraph (a) states that a cylinder must be an authorized packaging. Paragraph (b) sets forth requirements for persons performing requalification functions. We are adopting both as proposed in the NPRM.

In response to comments, we made several editorial revisions to paragraph (c). Several commenters requested we revise the paragraph to state a cylinder may be requalified at any time prior to the date requalification is due. They also suggested we reiterate the restriction against filling and offering a cylinder for transportation after its authorized service life has expired. We agree, and include the suggested changes in this final rule. Also, we are revising paragraph (c)(4) to require the set pressure of PRDs on DOT-3 series cylinders to be set at test pressure with a tolerance of plus zero to minus 10% at the first requalification due on or after October 1, 2002, as discussed in the preamble discussion to 173.301(f)(4).

Two commenters suggested we revise paragraph (d), which prescribes conditions requiring test and inspection of cylinders, to require the requalification of any DOT specification cylinder used for nonhazardous material service prior to its being returned to hazardous material service. This change is beyond the scope of this rulemaking and, therefore, is not adopted in this final rule. For the same reason, we are not adopting a suggestion to require any cylinder removed from service to be marked with a notation that the cylinder has been removed from service.

We revised the proposed wording in paragraph (d)(3) that read “the cylinder has been over-heated or over-pressurized” to state, instead, that the cylinder “shows evidence of, or is known to have been” over-heated. We removed the reference to over-pressurized cylinders for the reasons noted above in the discussion concerning the definition for “over-pressurized.” Any person in possession of an over-pressurized cylinder must determine the cylinder's suitability for continued use prior to offering the cylinder for transportation in commerce.

Paragraph (e) addresses cylinders containing Class 8 liquids. In this final rule, we modified the paragraph for consistency and clarity.

Paragraph (f) sets forth visual inspection requirements. A commenter suggested we revise the paragraph (f) introductory text to require an internal and an external visual inspection to be performed prior to the pressure test, and another internal inspection for contaminants and damaged threads after the pressure test. The commenter stated that performing the visual inspection prior to the pressure test will save time if the cylinder is unfit for pressure testing. The commenter stated that a cylinder that ruptures during the pressure test can damage equipment and property and may cause operational delays. We disagree. Some requalifiers have modernized their operations and perform hydrostatic tests on all cylinders, followed by visual inspections. We find no reason to limit the requalifiers' flexibility in deciding whether to perform the visual requalifications before or after the pressure test.

We are revising paragraph (f)(2) to require any coating or attachments that would inhibit inspection of the cylinder to be removed prior to performing a visual inspection. We had proposed to require any vinyl or plastic coating on a cylinder to be completely removed prior to performing a visual inspection. CGA suggested we revise the provision to apply only to cylinders with removable vinyl or plastic coatings. Other commenters suggested the removal of both internal and external vinyl or plastic coatings and, when necessary, layers of paint. A different commenter questioned whether wire wrapping should be remove prior to performing the inspection. In consideration of the comments, we are requiring the removal of any coating, attachment, or wrapping that hinders proper inspection of the cylinder surface.

We had proposed in paragraph (f)(4) to require DOT 3AL cylinders to be inspected for evidence of sustained load cracking in the neck and shoulder areas in accordance with the cylinder manufacturer's written recommendation. The manufacturer's recommendation must be approved in writing by the Associate Administrator. A commenter suggested we clarify that the procedure applies only to cylinders made of aluminum alloy 6351-T6. We agree. In this final rule, we revised the provision to require the inspection only for DOT specification or exemption cylinders made of aluminum alloy 6351-T6.

We are not adopting the provision in paragraph (g) to require the pressure test to be conducted in accordance with the procedures in paragraphs 4 and 5 of CGA Pamphlet C-1. One commenter objected to incorporation of Pamphlet C-1. In addition, it is our understanding that CGA is in the process of completely revising the C-1 standard. In this final rule, we revised paragraph (g) to incorporate the requirements for pressure testing cylinders that are currently in § 173.34(e)(4). We will consider incorporating the revised C-1 standard in a future rulemaking.

We had proposed to provide for use of an ultrasonic examination as an alternative requalification method. We had also proposed to allow other nondestructive test methods with the approval of the Associate Administrator. As discussed in the above referenced HM-220 termination notice, we are not adopting these provisions. We will continue to permit the use of ultrasonic examinations and other nondestructive methods under the exemption program.

Paragraph (h) establishes criteria for rejecting cylinders. We are adopting the provision in paragraph (h)(1) prohibiting a rejected cylinder from being marked as meeting the requirements of this section. A commenter requested we revise the paragraph to recognize that CGA Pamphlet C-6.2 establishes levels of damage for fiber reinforced exemption cylinders, some of which is repairable. This issue is more appropriately addressed in the specific exemptions authorizing use of fiber reinforced cylinders. Provided it is permitted under the exemption, repairs of such cylinders in accordance with CGA Pamphlet C-6.2 are permitted. Paragraph (h)(4)(iii) of this final rule permits a cylinder with a service pressure of less than 900 psig to be repaired in accordance with an exemption covering the manufacture, requalification, or use of the cylinder.

Paragraph (i) sets forth criteria for condemning cylinders. We had proposed in paragraph (i)(1)(viii) to require an aluminum or aluminum-lined cylinder to be condemned if exposed to a temperature exceeding 177° C (350° F). Numerous commenters representing fire fighters and emergency responder organizations strongly objected to the proposal. They stated it would require the removal of aluminum and composite exemption cylinders used as self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBAs) based on possible exposure to temperatures in excess of 350° F. These commenters noted that most SCBAs are exposed to temperatures exceeding 177° C (350° F) whenever they are carried into a fire. The commenters suggested that the NPRM proposal would require replacement of SCBAs after each fire exposure, resulting in substantial costs to the emergency response community.

Our intent was to require the removal from service of any aluminum cylinder or aluminum-lined composite exemption cylinder with reduced structural integrity resulting from the metal temperature of the aluminum cylinder or liner reaching a temperature above 350° F. Such cylinders may pose a safety risk. We did not intend to require the removal of undamaged cylinders from service. During typical firefighting operations, the metal temperature of an aluminum cylinder or liner does not reach temperatures above 350° F. We are revising the paragraph to require a cylinder to be condemned if over-heated. As defined in § 180.203 of this final rule, for an aluminum cylinder, “over-heated” means that the metal temperature of any part of the cylinder has reached a temperature in excess of 350° F.

Section 180.209

This section includes the requirements currently contained in § 173.34(e) for the periodic requalification of specification cylinders.

Paragraph (a) sets forth specific periodic requalification requirements for each specification cylinder. As discussed elsewhere in this preamble, we are not adopting the proposal to permit ultrasonic testing in place of a hydrostatic test. Ultrasonic testing will continue to be permitted under exemption.

Paragraph (b) establishes requalification requirements for DOT 3A and 3AA cylinders. We are revising the provision in paragraph (b)(1) to increase the requalification interval from five to 10 years for a DOT 3A and 3AA cylinder with a water capacity of 125 pounds or less that is used for certain named gases. A commenter stated numerous new refrigerants and blends are being marketed and requested we allow cylinders containing “fluorinated hydrocarbons, liquefied hydrocarbons, and mixtures thereof which are commercially free from corroding components' to be requalified every 10 years rather than every 5 years. The commenter also pointed out that we authorized these materials under DOT Exemptions 10184 and 12084. Several other commenters requested we add certain other gases to the list. We agree the listing in paragraph (b)(1)(ii) should be updated. In this final rule, we are revising this paragraph to accommodate commenters concerns.

Paragraph (c) sets forth requalification requirements for DOT 4-series cylinders, and is adopted as proposed in the NPRM.

Paragraph (d) prescribes requalification requirements for cylinders 12 pounds or less with service pressures of 300 psig or less, and is adopted a proposed in the NPRM.

Paragraph (e) includes requirements for proof pressure testing for certain DOT-4 series cylinders, and is adopted as proposed in the NPRM.

Paragraph (f) sets forth requalification requirements for cylinders used to transport poisonous materials, and is adopted as proposed in the NPRM.

We are revising paragraph (g) to clarify the interval for performance of a visual inspection, in place of a five-year periodic retest, for cylinders used exclusively for the listed non-corrosive gases.

Paragraph (h) sets forth requalification requirements for cylinders used to transport anhydrous ammonia, and is adopted as proposed in the NPRM.

Paragraph (i) sets forth requalification requirements for DOT-8 series cylinders, currently in § 173.34(e)(18). The provision requires the replacement valve to be the same weight as the valve to be replaced. If it is not, the cylinder's marked tare weight must be adjusted to compensate for the valve weight differential. The Chlorine Institute and two valve manufacturers requested we revise paragraph (i)(3) to allow a tolerance on the replacement valve weight to compensate for variations. The valve manufacturers suggested the tolerance should be a stated weight or a percentage of the weight of the valve being replaced. They recommended no specific weight or percentage. In the absence of a specific recommendation, we are adopting the provision as stated in the NPRM.

Section 180.211

This section prescribes repair, rebuild, and heat treatment requirements currently prescribed in §§ 173.34(g) thru 173.34(l), with certain revisions. We received no comments on these provisions and are adopting them as proposed with editorial revisions for clarity. We are not adopting the proposed requirements for metric-marked cylinders.

Section 180.213

This section consolidates the marking requirements currently contained in § 173.34, with certain revisions. These marking requirements identify the type of inspection, test, or work performed on a cylinder. Locating the marking requirements in a single section of the HMR will facilitate their use by shippers, carriers, and enforcement personnel.

We had proposed to allow the application of requalification markings by stamping, engraving, scribing, or any other method approved in writing by the Associate Administrator. NSWA and another commenter objected to the permissive use of electric or manual scribes as an alternative method. They stated markings made by a scribe are of poor quality, particularly over multiple coats of paint, and should not be permitted. Also, NSWA stated that, unless specifically approved for flammable atmospheres, electrical apparatuses may create a safety hazard when used to mark cylinders containing flammable gases or in plants where flammable gases may be present. The proposal was fully accepted by other commenters. Because of concerns raised about the quality of certain marking methods and to alleviate unnecessary delays incurred by obtaining an approval from the Associate Administrator, we have revised this provision in this final rule. We will permit the use of any marking method capable of producing durable, legible marks. A cylinder with illegible requalification markings will be considered out-of-test and will have to be retested before being returned to service. Also, we are allowing the use of pressure sensitive labels to display the requalification markings on fire extinguishers, as proposed.

Section 180.215

This section contains the reporting and record retention requirements currently prescribed in § 173.34(e)(8), with certain revisions.

We revised the retester authorization record requirements in current § 173.34(e)(8)(i) to include all cylinder requalifiers who inspect, test, repair, or rebuild cylinders. In addition, proposed paragraph (d)(1) requires records covering any work involving welding or brazing repairs, or the building or reheat treatment of cylinders to be retained by the cylinder requalifier for 15 years. The requalifier must retain inspection and test records until expiration of the inspection or requalification period or until the cylinder is again requalified, whichever occurs first. Records of any welding or brazing repair, rebuilding or reheat treatment must be retained for 15 years.

IV. Regulatory Analyses and Notices

A. Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures

This final rule is not considered a significant regulatory action under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866. It was reviewed informally by the Office of Management and Budget. The rule is not considered significant under the Regulatory Policies and Procedures of the Department of Transportation (44 FR 11034). A regulatory evaluation is available for review in the docket.

The compliance costs associated with this final rule are minimal. Most increased compliance costs involve the new requirement for a person who performs visual inspections of cylinders to obtain approval from the Associate Administrator and mark his RIN number on the cylinders he inspects. The aggregate cost to the industry of this new requirement is $29,520 per year. On a per facility basis, the cost is $20.50 per filing or $4.10 per year. Although they are difficult to quantity, the benefits associated with the provisions in this final rule are significant. This final rule will: (1) Enhance the accountability of the cylinder requalification process; (2) improve voluntary compliance with the cylinder requirements; (3) enhance enforcement related to cylinder requalifications; and (4) reduce the regulatory burden on the regulated industry while increasing its flexibility and providing an opportunity to use new technologies. Further, this final rule will improve cylinder transportation safety by reducing the number of unintentional releases of flammable and toxic material from DOT-3 series cylinders, prohibiting the use of an unsafe aluminum alloy for cylinder manufacture, and prohibiting the use of a cylinder after the expiration of its service life. Although we cannot assign definitive dollar amounts to these potential benefits, we believe that, taken together, the provisions of this final rule are the least costly alternatives available for ensuring an acceptable level of transportation safety. The potential benefits to society more than offset the potential costs associated with the final rule.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires an agency to review regulations to assess their impact on small entities unless the agency determines a rule is not expected to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This final rule imposes only minimal new costs of compliance on the regulated industry and, in fact, should reduce overall costs of compliance. Based on the assessment in the regulatory evaluation, I hereby certify that while this final rule applies to a substantial number of small entities, there will not be a significant economic impact on those small entities. A detailed Regulatory Flexibility analysis is available for review in the docket.

C. Executive Order 13132

This final rule has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and criteria contained in Executive Order 13132 (“Federalism”). This final rule preempts state, local, and Indian tribe requirements but does not propose any regulation with substantial direct effects on the states, the relationship between the national government and the states, or the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, the consultation and funding requirements of Executive Order 13132 do not apply.

Federal hazardous materials transportation law, 49 U.S.C. 5101-5127, contains an express preemption provision (49 U.S.C. 5125(b)) preempting state, local, and Indian tribe requirements on certain covered subjects. Covered subjects are:

(1) The designation, description, and classification of hazardous materials;

(2) The packing, repacking, handling, labeling, marking, and placarding of hazardous materials;

(3) The preparation, execution, and use of shipping documents related to hazardous materials and requirements related to the number, contents, and placement of those documents;

(4) The written notification, recording, and reporting of the unintentional release in transportation of hazardous material; or

(5) The design, manufacture, fabrication, marking, maintenance, recondition, repair, or testing of a packaging or container represented, marked, certified, or sold as qualified for use in transporting hazardous material.

This final rule addresses covered subject items 2 and 5 above and preempts state, local, and Indian tribe requirements not meeting the “substantively the same” standard. This final rule is necessary to assure an acceptable level of safety for the transportation of hazardous materials in cylinders.

Federal hazardous materials transportation law provides at section 5125(b)(2) that, if DOT issues a regulation concerning any of the covered subjects, DOT must determine and publish in the Federal Register the effective date of federal preemption. The effective date may not be earlier than the 90th day following the date of issuance of the final rule and not later than two years after the date of issuance. The effective date of federal preemption of this final rule is 90 days from publication of this final rule in the Federal Register.

D. Executive Order 13175

This final rule has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and criteria contained in Executive Order 13175 (“Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments”). Because this final rule does not significantly or uniquely affect the communities of the Indian tribal governments and does not impose substantial direct compliance costs, the funding and consultation requirements of Executive Order 13175 do not apply.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

This final rule does not impose unfunded mandates under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995. It does not result in costs of $100 million or more, in the aggregate, to any of the following: State, local, or Indian tribal governments, or the private sector. This rule is the least burdensome alternative to achieve the objective of the rule.

F. Paperwork Reduction Act

RSPA has current information collection approvals under OMB No. 2137-0022, Testing, Inspection, and Marking Requirements for Cylinders, with 168,431 burden hours and $10,882,516 annual costs, which expires October 31, 2004; and OMB No. 2137-0557, Approvals for Hazardous Materials, with 18,381 burden hours and $413,737.40 annual costs, which expires July 31, 2004. We believe that this rule may result in a minimal increase or decrease in annual burden hours and costs. These current approvals have been revised and submitted to OMB for extension and re-approval. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, no person is required to respond to an information collection unless it displays a valid OMB control number.

The information collection and recordkeeping requirements in current §§ 173.34, 173.302(c), and 178.35 (pertaining to records prepared by persons performing the requalification, repair, rebuild and use of cylinders) and requirements in current § 173.34 (pertaining to persons seeking approval to requalify cylinders) were approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and assigned OMB No. 2137-0022, with an expiration date of October 31, 2004. This information is used to verify that cylinders meet the required manufacturing standards prior to being authorized for initial use, and that, once manufactured, the cylinders are maintained and used in compliance with applicable requirements of the HMR. In this rule, these information collection and recordkeeping requirements for records used to verify that cylinders are being properly maintained for continuing hazardous material service are revised and redesignated in new §§ 180.205, 180.209, 180.211, 180.213, and 180.215, with no change in burden.

The information collection and recordkeeping requirements in current §§ 173.300a and 173.300b (pertaining to persons seeking approval to be an independent inspection agency and for chemical analyses and tests of DOT specification and exemption cylinders conducted outside the United States) were approved by OMB and assigned OMB No. 2137-0557, with an expiration date of July 31, 2004. The information is used to evaluate an applicants's qualification to perform the applicable requalification functions and to ensure that cylinders made outside the United States conform to the applicable HMR requirements. In this rule, the information collection and recordkeeping requirements are moved to new subpart I of part 107 and §§ 107.803, 107.805, 107.807, and 180.205(c). This final rule includes a new information collection and recordkeeping requirement for persons seeking approval to perform requalification functions that require marking a date on a cylinder. This new requirement is placed with the other hazardous materials approval requirements under OMB control number 2137-0557. This new approval is required every five years; therefore, first year and subsequent years' estimates are included in the burden estimates for OMB No. 2137-0557.

Because this final rule broadens the approval requirements for affected persons who requalify cylinders and relocates cylinder requalification requirements to other sections of the HMR, we revised the current burden hour submission and resubmitted the revised submission to OMB for extension and re-approval.

We estimate the total revised information collection and recordkeeping burden in this rule as follows:

OMB No. 2137-0022:

Number of Respondents: 139,352.

Total Annual Responses: 153,287.

Total Annual Burden Hours: 168,431.

Total Annual Burden Cost: $10,882,516.00.

OMB No. 2137-0557:

Number of Respondents: 10,718.

Total Annual Responses: 11,069.

Total Annual Burden Hours: 25,581 (1st year).

Total Annual Burden Cost: $561,337.40 (1st year).

Subsequent years 2-5 Burden Hours: 1,440 per year.

Subsequent years 2-5 Burden Cost: $29,520 per year.

Requests for a copy of the information collections should be directed to Deborah Boothe, Office of Hazardous Materials Standards (DHM-10), Research and Special Programs Administration, Room 8102, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590-0001, Telephone (202) 366-8553.

G. Regulation Identifier Number (RIN)

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

H. Environmental Assessment

This final rule incorporates new cylinder technologies through new and updated incorporations by reference of consensus standards developed by CGA; increases flexibility for cylinder manufacturers, requalifiers, and users; and facilitates compliance with the HMR by clarifying and reorganizing regulatory requirements applicable to cylinders. In addition, this final rule improves the overall safety performance of DOT specification cylinders by addressing several identified safety problems. To the extent that this final rule will reduce unintentional releases of hazardous materials from cylinders during transportation, it will reduce environmental damage associated with such releases. We find that there are no significant environmental impacts associated with this final rule.

List of Subjects

49 CFR Part 107

• Administrative practice and procedure
• Hazardous materials 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
• Labeling
• Packaging and containers
• Reporting and recordkeeping requirements

49 CFR Part 173

• Hazardous materials transportation
• Incorporation by reference
• Packaging and containers
• Radioactive materials
• Reporting and recordkeeping requirements
• Uranium

49 CFR Part 177

• Hazardous materials transportation
• Motor vehicle safety
• Packaging and containers
• Reporting and recordkeeping requirements

49 CFR Part 178

• Hazardous materials transportation
• Incorporation by reference
• Packaging and containers
• Reporting and recordkeeping requirements

49 CFR Part 179

• Hazardous materials transportation
• Incorporation by reference
• Railroad safety
• Reporting and recordkeeping requirements

49 CFR Part 180

• Hazardous materials transportation
• Incorporation by reference
• Motor vehicle safety
• Packaging and containers
• Reporting and recordkeeping requirements

In consideration of the foregoing, title 49, Chapter I, Subchapters A and C of the Code of Federal Regulations, are amended as follows:

PART 107—HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAM PROCEDURES

1. The authority citation for part 107 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101-5127, 44701; Sec. 212-213, Pub. L. 104-121, 110 Stat. 857; 49 CFR 1.45, 1.53.

2. In § 107.1, the definition of “Registration” is amended by removing the wording “registration with RSPA as a cylinder retester pursuant to 49 CFR 173.34(e)(1), or”.

3. Subpart I is added to part 107 to read as follows:

Subpart I—Approval of Independent Inspection Agencies, Cylinder Requalifiers, and Non-domestic Chemical Analyses and Tests of DOT Specification Cylinders

PART 171—GENERAL INFORMATION, REGULATIONS, AND DEFINITIONS

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

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101-5127; 49 CFR 1.53.

5. In § 171.2, paragraph (d)(3) is revised to read as follows:

6. In § 171.6, the table in paragraph (b)(2) is amended by revising the entries for 2137-0022 and 2137-0057, to read as follows:

7. In § 171.7, in the table in paragraph (a)(3), the following changes are made:

a. In the entry ASTM A 240/A 240M-94b, the wording “A 240M-94b” is revised to read “A 240M-99b”.

b. The entry ASTM A 388-67 is removed.

c. In the entry ASTM E 8-89, the wording “E 8-89 Tension Testing of Metallic Materials” is revised to read “E 8-99 Standard Test Methods for Tension Testing of Metallic Materials”.

d. In the entry ASTM E 23-60, in column 1, the wording “E 23-60 Notched Bar Impact Testing of Metallic Materials” is revised to read “E 23-98 Standard Test Methods for Notched Bar Impact Testing of Metallic Materials” and in column 2, the reference “; 179.400” is removed.

e. In the entry CGA Pamphlet C-3, in column 1, the wording “Standards for Welding and Brazing on Thinned Walled Containers, 1975” is revised to read “Standards for Welding on Thin-Walled Steel Cylinders, 1994” and in column 2, the reference “; 180.211” is added, in numerical order.

f. In the entry CGA Pamphlet C-5, in column 2, the reference “173.302” is removed and the reference “173.302a” is added in its place.

g. In the entry CGA Pamphlet C-6, in column 2, the reference “173.34;” is removed and the references “173.198; 180.205; 180.209; 180.211;” are added, in numerical order.

h. In the entry CGA Pamphlet C-6.1, in column 2, the reference “173.34” is removed and the references “180.205; 180.209” are added, in its place.

i. In the entry CGA Pamphlet C-6.2, in column 2, the reference “173.34” is removed and the reference “180.205” is added, in its place.

j. In the entry CGA Pamphlet C-6.3, in column 2, the reference “173.34” is removed and the references “180.205; 180.209” are added, in its place.

k. In the entry CGA Pamphlet C-8, in column 2, the reference “173.34” is removed and the reference “180.205” is added, in its place.

l. In the entry CGA Pamphlet C-12, in column 2, the reference “173.34;” is removed and the reference “173.301;” is added, in numerical order.

m. In the entry CGA Pamphlet C-13, in column 2, the reference “173.34;” is removed and the references “; 180.205; 180.209.” are added, in numerical order.

n. In the entry CGA Pamphlet C-14, in column 2, the reference “173.34” is removed and the reference “173.301” is added, in its place.

o. In the entry CGA Pamphlet S-1.1, in column 2, the reference “173.34” is removed and the reference “173.301; 173.304a.” is added, in its place.

p. Under General Services Administration, in the entry Federal Specification RR-C-901C, in column 2, the reference “173.304;” is removed and the reference “; 173.337” is added, in numerical order.

q. Two new entries are added in alphanumeric sequence under American Society for Testing and Materials, the address for Compressed Gas Association, Inc., is revised, and two new entries are added in alphanumeric sequence under Compressed Gas Association, to read as follows:

8. In § 171.8, in the definition of “Filling density”, paragraph (1) is amended by revising the reference “§ 173.304(a)(2) table note 1” to read “§ 173.304a(a)(2) table note 1”.

9. In § 171.12, paragraph (b)(15) is revised to read as follows:

PART 172—HAZARDOUS MATERIALS TABLE, SPECIAL PROVISIONS, HAZARDOUS MATERIALS COMMUNICATIONS, EMERGENCY RESPONSE INFORMATION, AND TRAINING REQUIREMENTS

10. The authority citation for part 172 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101-5127; 49 CFR 1.53.

11. In § 172.101, the Hazardous Materials Table is amended by revising the entries Cyanogen, Germane, and Iron pentacarbonyl, to read as follows:

PART 173—SHIPPERS—GENERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR SHIPMENTS AND PACKAGINGS

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

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101-5127, 44701; 49 CFR 1.45, 1.53.

13. Section 173.34 is removed.

14. Section 173.40 is revised to read as follows:

15. In § 173.115, the last sentence in paragraph (c)(2) and paragraph (j) are revised to read as follows:

16. Section 173.163 is revised to read as follows:

17. Section 173.192 is revised to read as follows:

18. In § 173.198, the last two sentences in paragraph (a) are revised to read as follows:

19. In § 173.226, paragraph (a) is revised to read as follows:

20. In § 173.227, the section heading and paragraph (a) are revised to read as follows:

21. Section 173.228 is revised to read as follows:

22. In part 173, §§ 173.300a, 173.300b, and 173.300c are removed.

23. Section 173.301 is revised to read as follows:

24. Section 173.301a is added to read as follows:

25. Section 173.301b is added and reserved.

26. Section 173.302 is revised to read as follows:

27. Section 173.302a is added to read as follows:

28. Section 173.302b is added and reserved.

29. Section 173.304 is revised to read as follows:

30. Section 173.304a is added to read as follows:

31. Section 173.304b is added and reserved.

32. In § 173.305, the parenthetical phrase in paragraph (b) is revised to read as follows:

33. In § 173.306, paragraph (g)(5) is revised to read as follows:

34. In § 173.315, in paragraph (a), in Note 2 following the table, the reference “§ 173.301(d)” is revised to read “paragraph (q) of this section”, and paragraph (q) is added to read as follows:

35. Section 173.334 is revised to read as follows:

36. Section 173.336 is revised to read as follows:

37. Section 173.337 is revised to read as follows:

PART 177 —CARRIAGE BY PUBLIC HIGHWAY

38. The authority citation for part 177 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101-5127; 49 CFR 1.53.

39. In § 177.840, paragraph (a)(1) is revised to read as follows:

PART 178—SPECIFICATIONS FOR PACKAGINGS

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

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101-5127; 49 CFR 1.53.

41. In § 178.35, paragraphs (b) introductory text, (b)(1), (c)(3)(iv), (d), (e), and (f)(3) are revised to read as follows:

42. In § 178.36, in paragraph (k)(3)(i), the wording “ASTM Standard E8” is revised to read “ASTM E 8 (incorporated by reference; see § 171.7 of this subchapter)”.

43. In § 178.37, in paragraph (k)(3)(i), the wording “ASTM Standard E8” is revised to read “ASTM E 8 (incorporated by reference; see § 171.7 of this subchapter)”.

44. In § 178.38, in paragraph (k)(3)(i), the wording “ASTM Standard E8” is revised to read “ASTM E 8 (incorporated by reference; see § 171.7 of this subchapter)”.

45. In § 178.39, in paragraph (k)(3)(i), the wording “ASTM Standard E8” is revised to read “ASTM E 8 (incorporated by reference; see § 171.7 of this subchapter)”.

46. In § 178.44, in paragraph (m)(3)(i), the wording “ASTM Standard E8” is revised to read “ASTM E 8 (incorporated by reference; see § 171.7 of this subchapter)”.

47. In § 178.45, paragraphs (h) and (j)(3)(i) are revised to read as follows:

48. In § 178.46, in paragraph (b)(4), in Table 2, the entry “6351-T6” is removed, and Table 1 is revised to read as follows:

49. In § 178.47, in the fourth sentence of paragraph (d), the wording “CGA Pamphlet C-3” is revised to read “CGA Pamphlet C-3 (incorporated by reference; see § 171.7 of this subchapter)”.

50. In § 178.50, the following changes are made:

a. In paragraph (d) introductory text, in the fifth sentence, the wording “CGA Pamphlet C-3” is revised to read “CGA Pamphlet C-3 (incorporated by reference; see § 171.7 of this subchapter)”.

b. In paragraph (k)(3)(i), the wording “ASTM Standard E8” is revised to read “ASTM E 8 (incorporated by reference; see § 171.7 of this subchapter)”.

51. In § 178.51, the following changes are made:

a. In paragraph (d)(2), the wording “CGA Pamphlet C-3” is revised to read “CGA Pamphlet C-3 (incorporated by reference; see § 171.7 of this subchapter)”.

b. In paragraph (j)(3)(i), the wording “ASTM Standard E8” is revised to read “ASTM E 8 (incorporated by reference; see § 171.7 of this subchapter)”.

c. In paragraph (l)(1), in the fourth sentence, the wording “CGA Pamphlet C-3” is revised to read “CGA Pamphlet C-3 (incorporated by reference; see § 171.7 of this subchapter)”.

d. In paragraph (l)(2), in the last sentence, the wording “CGA Pamphlet C-3” is revised to read “CGA Pamphlet C-3 (incorporated by reference; see § 171.7 of this subchapter)”.

e. In paragraph (l)(3), in the first sentence, the wording “CGA Pamphlet C-3” is revised to read “CGA Pamphlet C-3 (incorporated by reference; see § 171.7 of this subchapter)”.

52. In § 178.53, the following changes are made:

a. In paragraph (d), in the last sentence, the wording “CGA Pamphlet C-3” is revised to read “CGA Pamphlet C-3 (incorporated by reference; see § 171.7 of this subchapter)”.

b. In paragraph (j)(5)(i), the wording “ASTM Standard E8” is revised to read “ASTM E 8 (incorporated by reference; see § 171.7 of this subchapter)”.

53. In § 178.55, in paragraph (k)(3)(i), the wording “ASTM Standard E8” is revised to read “ASTM E 8 (incorporated by reference; see § 171.7 of this subchapter)”.

54. In § 178.56, the following changes are made:

a. In paragraph (j)(3)(i), the wording “ASTM Standard E8” is revised to read “ASTM E 8 (incorporated by reference; see § 171.7 of this subchapter)”.

b. In paragraph (l)(1), in the fourth sentence the wording “CGA Pamphlet C-3” is revised to read “CGA Pamphlet C-3 (incorporated by reference; see § 171.7 of this subchapter)”.

c. In paragraph (l)(2), in the last sentence, the wording “CGA Pamphlet C-3” is revised to read “CGA Pamphlet C-3 (incorporated by reference; see § 171.7 of this subchapter)”.

d. In paragraph (l)(3), in the first sentence, the wording “CGA Pamphlet C-3” is revised to read “CGA Pamphlet C-3 (incorporated by reference; see § 171.7 of this subchapter)”.

55. In § 178.57, the first sentence in paragraph (d)(5), the first sentence in paragraph (e)(3), paragraph (j)(3)(i), the fourth sentence in paragraph (l)(1), the last sentence in paragraph (l)(2), the first sentence in paragraph (l)(3), the first sentence in paragraph (l)(4)(v), the second sentence in paragraph (l)(4)(vi), paragraph (m)(1), and the first sentence in paragraph (o)(1) are revised to read as follows:

56. In § 178.58, the following changes are made:

a. In paragraph (d)(1), in the last sentence, the wording “CGA Pamphlet C-3” is revised to read “CGA Pamphlet C-3 (incorporated by reference; see § 171.7 of this subchapter)”.

b. In paragraph (m)(5)(i), the wording “ASTM Standard E8” is revised to read “ASTM E 8 (incorporated by reference; see § 171.7 of this subchapter)”.

57. In § 178.59, the following changes are made:

a. In paragraph (d), in the last sentence, the wording “CGA Pamphlet C-3” is revised to read “CGA Pamphlet C-3 (incorporated by reference; see § 171.7 of this subchapter)”.

b. In paragraph (j)(3)(i), the wording “ASTM Standard E8” is revised to read “ASTM E 8 (incorporated by reference; see § 171.7 of this subchapter)”.

58. In § 178.60, the following changes are made:

a. In paragraph (d), in the last sentence, the wording “CGA Pamphlet C-3” is revised to read “CGA Pamphlet C-3 (incorporated by reference; see § 171.7 of this subchapter)”.

b. In paragraph (l)(3)(i), the wording “ASTM Standard E8” is revised to read “ASTM E 8 (incorporated by reference; see § 171.7 of this subchapter)”.

c. In paragraph (n)(1), in the second sentence, the wording “CGA Pamphlet C-3” is revised to read “CGA Pamphlet C-3 (incorporated by reference; see § 171.7 of this subchapter)”.

d. In paragraph (n)(2), in the last sentence, the wording “CGA Pamphlet C-3” is revised to read “CGA Pamphlet C-3 (incorporated by reference; see § 171.7 of this subchapter)”.

e. In paragraph (n)(3), in the first sentence, the wording “CGA Pamphlet C-3” is revised to read “CGA Pamphlet C-3 (incorporated by reference; see § 171.7 of this subchapter)”.

59. In § 178.61, the following changes are made:

a. In paragraph (d)(4), the wording “CGA Pamphlet C-3” is revised to read “CGA Pamphlet C-3 (incorporated by reference; see § 171.7 of this subchapter)”.

b. In paragraph (j)(3)(i), the wording “ASTM Standard E8” is revised to read “ASTM E 8 (incorporated by reference; see § 171.7 of this subchapter)”.

c. In paragraph (l)(1), in the last sentence, the wording “CGA Pamphlet C-3” is revised to read “CGA Pamphlet C-3 (incorporated by reference; see § 171.7 of this subchapter)”.

d. In paragraph (l)(2), in the last sentence, the wording “CGA Pamphlet C-3” is revised to read “CGA Pamphlet C-3 (incorporated by reference; see § 171.7 of this subchapter)”.

e. In paragraph (l)(3), in the first sentence, the wording “CGA Pamphlet C-3” is revised to read “CGA Pamphlet C-3 (incorporated by reference; see § 171.7 of this subchapter)”.

f. In paragraph (m)(1), in the first sentence, the wording “CGA Pamphlet C-3” is revised to read “CGA Pamphlet C-3 (incorporated by reference; see § 171.7 of this subchapter)”.

60. In § 178.65, in paragraph (c)(4), the wording “CGA Pamphlet C-3” is revised to read “CGA Pamphlet C-3 (incorporated by reference; see § 171.7 of this subchapter)”.

61. In § 178.68, the following changes are made:

a. In paragraph (j)(3)(i), the wording “ASTM Standard E8” is revised to read “ASTM E 8 (incorporated by reference; see § 171.7 of this subchapter)”.

b. In paragraph (l)(2), in the third sentence, the wording “CGA Pamphlet C-3” is revised to read “CGA Pamphlet C-3 (incorporated by reference; see § 171.7 of this subchapter)”.

62. Appendix A is added to subpart C of part 178, to read as follows:

Appendix A to Subpart C of Part 178—Illustrations: Cylinder Tensile Sample

The following figures illustrate the recommended locations for test specimens taken from welded cylinders:

Image Not Available

Image Not Available

Image Not Available

Image Not Available

Image Not Available

63. In § 178.358-5, in paragraph (c), the wording “ASTM A-240, Type 304L” is revised to read “ASTM A 240/A 240M (incorporated by reference; see § 171.1 of this subchapter), Type 304L”.

PART 179—SPECIFICATIONS FOR TANK CARS

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

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101-5127; 49 CFR 1.53.

65. In § 179.100-7, in the table in paragraph (c)(1), the wording “ASTM A240,” is revised to read “ASTM A 240/A 240M (incorporated by reference; see § 171.7 of this subchapter),” each time it appears.

66. In § 179.100-10, in paragraph (c), the wording “ASTM A 240” is revised to read “ASTM A 240/A 240M (incorporated by reference; see § 171.7 of this subchapter)”.

67. In § 179.102-1, in paragraph (a)(1), in the last sentence, the wording “ASTM Specification A 240” is revised to read “ASTM A 240/A 240M (incorporated by reference; see § 171.7 of this subchapter)”.

68. In § 179.102-4, in paragraph (a)(1), the wording “ASTM Specification A240” is revised to read “ASTM A 240/A 240M (incorporated by reference; see § 171.7 of this subchapter)”.

69. In § 179.102-17, in paragraph (b)(1), the wording “ASTM Specification A240” is revised to read “ASTM A 240/A 240M (incorporated by reference; see § 171.7 of this subchapter)”.

70. In § 179.200-7, in the table in paragraph (d), the wording “ASTM A 240” is revised to read “ASTM A 240/A 240M (incorporated by reference; see § 171.7 of this subchapter)” each time it appears.

71. In § 179.201-5, the following revisions are made:

a. In paragraph (a), the wording “ASTM Specification A 240” is revised to read “ASTM A 240/A 240M (incorporated by reference; see § 171.7 of this subchapter)” each time it appears.

b. In paragraph (b), the wording “ASTM Specification A 240” is revised to read “ASTM A 240/A 240M (incorporated by reference; see § 171.7 of this subchapter)”.

72. In § 179.220-7, in the table in paragraph (d), the wording “ASTM A 240,” is revised to read “ASTM A 240/A 240M (incorporated by reference; see § 171.7 of this subchapter),” each time it appears.

73. In § 179.400-5, in paragraph (a) introductory text, the wording “ASTM Specification A240,” is revised to read “ASTM A 240/A 240M (incorporated by reference; see § 171.7 of this subchapter)”.

PART 180—CONTINUING QUALIFICATION AND MAINTENANCE OF PACKAGINGS

74. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101-5127; 49 CFR 1.53.

75. Subpart C is added to part 180 to read as follows:

Subpart C—Qualification, Maintenance and Use of Cylinders

Subpart C—Qualification, Maintenance and Use of Cylinders