Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration Office of Hazardous Materials Safety; Notice of Delays in Processing of Special Permit Applications, 11084-11085 [07-1130]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
11084
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 47 / Monday, March 12, 2007 / Notices
size tire at 2,180 kg (4,805 pounds) for
the load range F tires mounted on 15
degree drop center rims, whereas the GB
9744 document lists the value of the
maximum load rating at 2,160 kg (4,752
pounds), according to the petitioner, or
20 kg pounds less than the TRA value.
The petition states that the two
subject tire sizes are used in the
intermodal transportation industry on
dual axle, dual wheel (8 tires and rims)
trailers and container chassis with a
total load rating for the two axles of
15,455 kg (34,000 pounds). Based on the
maximum tire load rating, the TRA
maximum load capacity for eight 10–20
or 11–22.5 bias ply, load range F tires
is 17,436 kg (38,440 pounds) and the
maximum load capacity for eight similar
tires based on the GB 9744 data
obtained from the petitioner is 17,280 kg
(38,016 pounds). Both load capacities
are, according to the petitioner, well
above the maximum allowable load
limit (34,000 pounds) for the intermodal
trailers and container chassis. The
petitioner further stated that the small
difference in maximum load rating
between the GB 9744 and the TRA
specifications is inconsequential to
motor vehicle safety.
FMVSS No. 119 establishes the safety
performance requirements for tires used
on vehicles other than passenger cars.
The requirements for tire endurance,
strength, high speed performance,
treadwear indicators, and tire markings
are specified in paragraph S6 of the
standard and are tested in accordance
with the conditions and procedures
specified in paragraph S7.
Paragraph S5.1(b) of FMVSS No. 119
lists the publications that may be used
by tire manufacturers for rim matching,
tire size, and maximum tire load rating
with corresponding inflation pressure.
Paragraph S6.6, Maximum load rating,
requires that the maximum load rating
labeled on a tire in accordance with
paragraph S6.5, Tire markings, meet or
exceed the lowest load rating value
specified in the publications listed in
Section 5.1(b) for that tire size.
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES
B. Discussion
FMVSS No. 119 allows tire
manufacturers to use any one of the
seven publications in S5.1(b) to obtain
rim, and tire load and inflation pressure
information for the labeling
requirements of paragraph S6.5.
The petitioner provided one page of
the GB 9744 publication, which
included one of the two bias ply tire
sizes discussed in the petition. The
agency does not recognize specifications
for one or two tire sizes from a technical
reference year book, but would consider
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:04 Mar 09, 2007
Jkt 211001
recognition of an entire standardization
publication.
If the organization that publishes GB
9744 would like its publication to be
considered for inclusion in the list of
publications in FMVSS No. 119,
paragraph S5.1(b), that organization is
invited to submit information to
NHTSA. The type of information
contained in these publications includes
its membership, objectives, and the
organizations that provide technical
support, in addition to its tire and rim
specifications. PCR submitted a petition
for rulemaking requesting that GB 9744
maximum tire load ratings for two tire
sizes be accepted by NHTSA. However,
PCR did not indicate whether it had any
communication with the organization
that publishes GB 9744 prior to
submitting the petition. NHTSA does
not consider recognizing tire
standardization organizations upon the
request of tire distributors.
The petitioner believes that the
agency is accepting tire markings
(paragraph S6.5, Tire markings) from
sources that are not on the list in
paragraph S5.1(b). The agency does not
accept tire maximum load ratings that
do not comply with the requirements in
paragraph S6.6, which state that the
maximum load rating for a particular
tire size must be equal to or greater than
the lowest maximum load rating for that
tire size published in the list of
technical reference year books in
paragraph S5.1(b).
C. Agency Determination
After review of the tire specifications
from the sources listed in FMVSS No.
119, the Scandinavian Tire and Rim
Technical Organization publication has
the lowest values for the maximum load
rating of the 10–20 size tire with 2,305
kg (5,071 pounds) for the single
application rating and 2,120 kg (4,664
pounds) for the dual rating. The GB
9744 values for the maximum load
rating for 10–20 bias ply tire, load range
F, 2,465 kg (5,434 pounds) for the single
rating and 2,160 kg (4,752 pounds) for
the dual rating, are greater than the
values specified in the Scandinavian
Tire and Rim Technical Organization
publication for that size tire. Tire
manufacturers may label the 10–20 size
tires with the GB 9744 value for the
rated maximum load without violating
the requirements of FMVSS No. 119,
S6.6 Maximum load rating. Therefore,
PCR’s petition is moot with regard to the
10–20 tire size.
The Tire and Rim Association value
for maximum load rating is the lowest
value for 11–22.5 size tires 2,180 kg
(4,805 pounds) specified in the
publications listed in paragraph S5.1(b)
PO 00000
Frm 00114
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
of FMVSS No. 119. The documents
forwarded to the agency by the
petitioner do not include maximum
load data for the 11–22.5 tire size, but
NHTSA was informed by the petitioner
that the 11–22.5 tire size has the same
maximum load rating as the 10–20 tire
size. Therefore, labeling an 11–22.5 size
tire with the GB 9744 value for
maximum load rating would not comply
with the standard as currently written.
The PCR petition with respect to the
11–22.5 size tires is denied because the
agency does not consider adding
specifications for a single tire size to the
accepted reference documents in
paragraph S5.1(b) of FMVSS No. 119.
Issued: March 6, 2007.
Stephen R. Kratzke,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. E7–4301 Filed 3–9–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials
Safety Administration Office of
Hazardous Materials Safety; Notice of
Delays in Processing of Special Permit
Applications
Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration, DOT.
ACTION: List of Applications Delayed
more than 180 days.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: In accordance with the
requirements of 49 U.S.C. 5117(c),
PHMSA is publishing the following list
of special permit applications that have
been in process for 180 days or more.
The reason(s) for delay and the expected
completion date for action on each
application is provided in association
with each identified application.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ann
Mazzullo, Office of Hazardous Materials
Special Permits and Approvals, Pipeline
and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 400 Seventh Street,
SW., Washington, DC 20590–0001, (202)
366–4535.
Key to ‘‘Reason for Delay’’
1. Awaiting additional information
from applicant.
2. Extensive public comment under
review.
3. Application is technically complex
and is of significant impact or
precedent-setting and requires extensive
analysis.
4. Staff review delayed by other
priority issues or volume special permit
applications.
E:\FR\FM\12MRN1.SGM
12MRN1
11085
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 47 / Monday, March 12, 2007 / Notices
Meaning of Application Number
Suffixes
Issued in Washington, DC, on March 6,
2007.
Delmer F. Billings,
Director, Office of Hazardous Materials
Safety, Special Permits & Approvals.
X—Renewal
PM—Party to application with
modification request
N—New application
M—Modification request
Application No.
Estimated
date of
completion
Reason for
delay
Applicant
New Special Permit Applications
14314–N
14330–N
14343–N
14385–N
14397–N
14402–N
14398–N
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
North American Automotive Hazmat Action Committee ..........................................................
Chemical & Metal Industries, Inc., Hudson, Co .......................................................................
Valero St. Charles, Norco, LA ..................................................................................................
Kansas City Southern Railway Company, Kansas City, MO ...................................................
UltraCell Corporation, Livermore, CA .......................................................................................
Lincoln Composites, Lincoln, NE ..............................................................................................
Lyondell Chemical Company, Houston, TX .............................................................................
1
4
1
4
1
1
4
07–31–2007
03–31–2007
04–30–2007
03–31–2007
03–31–2007
12–31–2007
03–31–2007
4
4
03–31–2007
03–31–2007
Modification to Special Permits
10481–M ...........
11447–M ...........
M–Engineering Limited, Bradford, West Yorkshire ..................................................................
SAES Pure Gas, Inc., San Louis Obispo, CA ..........................................................................
[FR Doc. 07–1130 Filed 3–9–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–60–M
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Surface Transportation Board
[STB Ex Parte No. 671]
Rail Capacity and Infrastructure
Requirements
AGENCY:
Surface Transportation Board,
DOT.
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES
ACTION:
Notice of public hearing.
SUMMARY: The Surface Transportation
Board will hold a public hearing
beginning at 9 a.m. on Wednesday,
April 11, 2007, at its new offices in
Washington, DC. The purpose of the
public hearing will be to examine issues
related to rail traffic forecasts and
infrastructure requirements. Persons
wishing to speak at the hearing should
notify the Board in writing.
DATES: The public hearing will take
place on Wednesday, April 11, 2007.
Any person wishing to speak at the
hearing should file with the Board a
written notice of intent to participate,
and should identify the party, the
proposed speaker, the time requested,
and the topic(s) to be covered, as soon
as possible but no later than March 21,
2007. Each speaker should also file with
the Board his/her written testimony by
April 4, 2007. Written submissions by
interested persons who do not wish to
appear at the hearing will also be due
by April 4, 2007.
ADDRESSES: All notices of intent to
participate and testimony may be
submitted either via the Board’s e-filing
format or in the traditional paper
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:04 Mar 09, 2007
Jkt 211001
format. Any person using e-filing should
comply with the Board’s https://
www.stb.dot.gov Web site, at the ‘‘EFILING’’ link. Any person submitting a
filing in the traditional paper format
should send an original and 10 copies
of the filing to: Surface Transportation
Board, Attn: STB Ex Parte No. 671, 395
E Street, SW., Washington, DC 20423–
0001.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Joseph H. Dettmar, (202) 245–0395.
[Assistance for the hearing impaired is
available through the Federal
Information Relay Service (FIRS) at:
(800) 877–8339.]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In recent
years, there has been growing
recognition that rail capacity in the
United States has become constrained.
Those capacity constraints come at the
same time as many forecasts predict that
rail freight demands will continue to
grow over the next twenty years.
Railroads experienced a more than 50%
increase in traffic from 1990 to 2003,
and traffic is projected to continue to
increase as the economy grows.1 Some
forecasters predict that multimodal
freight tonnage in the United States will
rise by nearly 70% between 1998 and
2020.2 The convergence of increased
demand with constrained capacity has
highlighted the need to address what
further infrastructure investment will be
required to meet these demands. While
some railroads have announced
significant infrastructure investment
plans, some observers have questioned
1 Congressional Budget Office Report, Freight Rail
Transportation: Long-Term Issues, at 4–5 (January
2006).
2 Id. at 6, citing, Federal Highway Administration,
Freight Analysis Framework (October 2002).
PO 00000
Frm 00115
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
whether that investment alone will be
sufficient to meet the rail transport
needs of a growing economy.
In regulating the railroad industry, the
Board is called upon, among other
things, to ensure the development and
continuation of a sound rail
transportation system with effective
competition and coordination between
rail carriers and other modes. Pursuant
to that objective, the Board will hold a
public hearing as a forum for interested
persons to provide views and
information about: Freight traffic
forecasts; the extent of the capacity
constraints and the ability of the
railroads to meet the rising demand; the
infrastructure investment needed to
ensure that the Nation’s freight rail
system continues to operate in an
efficient and reliable manner; possible
solutions to the challenges presented by
growing rail traffic and limited capacity;
and the potential role of public-private
partnerships and innovative financing
tools in meeting these challenges. We
look forward to hearing from all parties
affected by these issues, including
carriers, shippers, port administrators,
state entities and federal agencies.
Date of Hearing. The hearing will
begin at 9 a.m. on Wednesday, April 11,
2007, in the 1st floor hearing room at
the Board’s new headquarters at 395 E
Street, SW., in Washington, DC, and
will continue, with short breaks if
necessary, until every person scheduled
to speak has been heard.
Notice of Intent To Participate. Any
person wishing to speak at the hearing
should file with the Board a written
notice of intent to participate, and
should identify the party, the proposed
speaker, the time requested, and topic(s)
E:\FR\FM\12MRN1.SGM
12MRN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 47 (Monday, March 12, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11084-11085]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-1130]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration Office of
Hazardous Materials Safety; Notice of Delays in Processing of Special
Permit Applications
AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, DOT.
ACTION: List of Applications Delayed more than 180 days.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In accordance with the requirements of 49 U.S.C. 5117(c),
PHMSA is publishing the following list of special permit applications
that have been in process for 180 days or more. The reason(s) for delay
and the expected completion date for action on each application is
provided in association with each identified application.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ann Mazzullo, Office of Hazardous
Materials Special Permits and Approvals, Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, 400
Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590-0001, (202) 366-4535.
Key to ``Reason for Delay''
1. Awaiting additional information from applicant.
2. Extensive public comment under review.
3. Application is technically complex and is of significant impact
or precedent-setting and requires extensive analysis.
4. Staff review delayed by other priority issues or volume special
permit applications.
[[Page 11085]]
Meaning of Application Number Suffixes
N--New application
M--Modification request
X--Renewal
PM--Party to application with modification request
Issued in Washington, DC, on March 6, 2007.
Delmer F. Billings,
Director, Office of Hazardous Materials Safety, Special Permits &
Approvals.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reason for Estimated date
Application No. Applicant delay of completion
------------------------------------------------------------------------
New Special Permit Applications
------------------------------------------------------------------------
14314-N............... North American 1 07-31-2007
Automotive
Hazmat Action
Committee.
14330-N............... Chemical & Metal 4 03-31-2007
Industries,
Inc., Hudson,
Co.
14343-N............... Valero St. 1 04-30-2007
Charles, Norco,
LA.
14385-N............... Kansas City 4 03-31-2007
Southern
Railway
Company, Kansas
City, MO.
14397-N............... UltraCell 1 03-31-2007
Corporation,
Livermore, CA.
14402-N............... Lincoln 1 12-31-2007
Composites,
Lincoln, NE.
14398-N............... Lyondell 4 03-31-2007
Chemical
Company,
Houston, TX.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Modification to Special Permits
------------------------------------------------------------------------
10481-M............... M-Engineering 4 03-31-2007
Limited,
Bradford, West
Yorkshire.
11447-M............... SAES Pure Gas, 4 03-31-2007
Inc., San Louis
Obispo, CA.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 07-1130 Filed 3-9-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-60-M
