Hazardous Materials: Chemical Oxygen Generators, 52896-52900 [E9-24779]

Agencies

• Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
• DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 198 (Thursday, October 15, 2009)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 52896-52900]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-24779]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 172

[Docket No. PHMSA-2009-0238 (HM-224G)]
RIN 2137-AE49


Hazardous Materials: Chemical Oxygen Generators

AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This direct final rule amends the Hazardous Materials 
Regulations to revise the quantity limitation from 25 kg ``gross'' to 
25 kg ``net'' for packages of chemical oxygen generators transported 
aboard cargo aircraft only. The intended effect of this rule is to 
provide regulatory relief by raising the quantity threshold for 
shipments of chemical oxygen generators transported aboard cargo 
aircraft only. This action is necessary to address difficulties 
concerning implementation and compliance with the requirements for the 
transportation of chemical oxygen generators in outer packagings 
meeting certain flame penetration resistance standards and thermal 
protection capabilities, as evidenced by comments received from the 
hazardous materials industry and other interested parties. The 
amendment contained in this rule is a minor substantive change, in the 
public interest, and unlikely to result in adverse comment.

DATES: This direct final rule is effective November 16, 2009, unless an 
adverse comment or notice of intent to file an adverse comment is 
received by November 16, 2009. PHMSA will publish in the Federal 
Register a timely document confirming the effective date of this final 
rule.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by the docket number 
PHMSA-2009-0238 by any of the following methods:
    Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.
    Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
    Mail: Docket Operations, U.S. Department of Transportation, West 
Building, Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Routing Symbol M-30, 1200 New 
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
    Hand Delivery: To Docket Operations; Room W12-140 on the ground 
floor of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 
20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal 
holidays.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the agency name and 
docket number for this rule. Note that all comments received will be 
posted without change, including any personal information provided.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: T. Glenn Foster, (202) 366-8553, U.S. 
Department of Transportation, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety 
Administration, Office of Hazardous Materials Standards, 1200 New 
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

List of Topics

I. Background
II. Appeals to the January 31, 2007 Final Rule
III. Petitions to the January 31, 2007 Final Rule
IV. Summary of the Direct Final Rule
V. Regulatory Analyses and Notices
    A. Statutory/Legal Authority for Rulemaking
    B. Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and 
Procedures
    C. Executive Order 13132
    D. Executive Order 13175
    E. Regulatory Flexibility Act, Executive Order 13272, and DOT 
Procedures and Policies
    F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
    G. Paperwork Reduction Act
    H. Regulation Identifier Number (RIN)
    I. Environmental Assessment
    J. Privacy Act

I. Background

    The National Transportation Safety Board found that one of the 
probable causes of the May 11, 1996 crash of ValuJet Airlines flight 
No. 596 was a fire in the airplane's cargo compartment that was 
initiated and enhanced by the actuation of one or more chemical oxygen 
generators that were being improperly carried as cargo. Following that 
tragedy, in which 110 lives were lost, the Department of 
Transportation:

--Prohibited the transportation of chemical oxygen generators 
(including personal-use chemical oxygen generators) on board passenger-
carrying aircraft and the transportation of spent chemical oxygen 
generators on both passenger-carrying and cargo-only aircraft, 61 FR 
26418 (May 24, 1996), 61 FR 68952 (Dec. 30, 1996), 64 FR 45388 (Aug. 
19, 1999);
--Issued standards governing the transportation of chemical oxygen 
generators on cargo-only aircraft (and by motor vehicle, rail car and 
vessel), including the requirement for an approval issued by the 
Research and Special Programs Administration

[[Page 52897]]

(RSPA), the predecessor agency to the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials 
Safety Administration (PHMSA), 62 FR 30767 (June 5, 1997), 62 FR 34667 
(June 27, 1997);
--Upgraded fire safety standards for Class D cargo compartments on 
aircraft to require a smoke or fire detection system and a means of 
suppressing a fire or minimizing the available oxygen, on certain 
transport-category aircraft, 63 FR 8033 (Feb. 17, 1998); and
--Imposed additional requirements on the transportation of cylinders of 
compressed oxygen by aircraft and prohibited the carriage of chemical 
oxidizers in inaccessible aircraft cargo compartments that do not have 
a fire or smoke detection and fire suppression system, 64 FR 45388 
(Aug. 19, 1999).

    In the August 19, 1999 final rule, we amended the Hazardous 
Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180) to: (1) Allow a 
limited number of cylinders containing medical-use oxygen to be carried 
in the cabin of a passenger-carrying aircraft, 49 CFR 175.10(b); (2) 
limit the number of oxygen cylinders that may be carried as cargo in 
compartments that lack a fire suppression system and require that 
cylinders be stowed horizontally on the floor or as close as 
practicable to the floor of the cargo compartment or unit load device, 
49 CFR 175.85(h) & (i); and (3) require each cylinder of compressed 
oxygen (in the passenger cabin or a cargo compartment) to be placed in 
an overpack or outer packaging that meets the performance criteria of 
Air Transport Association Specification 300 for Type I (ATA 300) 
shipping containers, 49 CFR 172.102, Special Provision A52.
    On January 31, 2007, PHMSA issued a final rule under Docket No. 
RSPA-04-17664 (HM-224B) to enhance the safety standards for 
transportation by air of compressed oxygen, other oxidizing gases, and 
chemical oxygen generators (72 FR 4442). Specifically, the final rule 
amended the HMR to require cylinders of compressed oxygen and chemical 
oxygen generators to be transported in an outer packaging that: (1) 
Meets the same flame penetration resistance standards as required for 
cargo compartment sidewalls and ceiling panels in transport category 
airplanes; and (2) provides certain thermal protection capabilities so 
as to retain its contents during an otherwise controllable cargo 
compartment fire. These performance requirements must remain in effect 
for the entire service life of the outer packaging. The outer packaging 
standard addresses two safety concerns--protecting a cylinder and an 
oxygen generator that could be exposed directly to flames from a fire 
and protecting a cylinder and an oxygen generator that could be exposed 
indirectly to heat from a fire.
    In addition, an outer packaging for a cylinder containing 
compressed oxygen or another oxidizing gas and a package containing an 
oxygen generator were required to meet the standards in Part III of 
Appendix F to 14 CFR Part 25, Test Method to Determine Flame 
Penetration Resistance of Cargo Compartment Liners. An outer 
packaging's materials of construction must prevent penetration by a 
flame of 1,700 [deg]F for five minutes, in accordance with Part III of 
Appendix F, paragraphs (a)(3) and (f)(5) of 14 CFR Part 25.
    Further, a cylinder of compressed oxygen or another oxidizing gas 
must remain below the temperature at which its pressure relief device 
would activate and an oxygen generator must not actuate when exposed to 
a temperature of at least 400 [deg]F for three hours. The 400 [deg]F 
temperature is the estimated mean temperature of a cargo compartment 
during a halon-suppressed fire. Three hours and 27 minutes is the 
maximum estimated diversion time world-wide, based on an aircraft 
flying a southern route over the Pacific Ocean. Data collected during 
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) tests indicate that, on average, 
a 3AA seamless steel oxygen cylinder with a pressure relief device set 
at cylinder test pressure will open when the cylinder reaches a 
temperature of approximately 300 [deg]F. This result is consistent with 
calculations performed by PHMSA. In analyzing pressure relief device 
(PRD) function, PHMSA calculated that a 3HT seamless steel cylinder for 
aircraft with a PRD set at 90% of cylinder test pressure will vent at 
temperatures greater than 220 [deg]F. In order to assure an adequate 
safety margin for all authorized cylinders, including 3HT cylinders, we 
amended the HMR to require cylinders of compressed oxygen and other 
oxidizing gases, which are contained in the specified outer packaging, 
to maintain an external temperature below 93 [deg]C (199 [deg]F) when 
exposed to a 400 [deg]F temperature for three hours.

II. Appeals to the January 31, 2007 Final Rule

    The following organizations submitted appeals to the January 31, 
2007 final rule, in accordance with 49 CFR Part 106: Air Canada (AC); 
Barlen and Associates, Inc. (Barlen); PSI Plus, Inc. (PSI); and United 
Airlines, Inc. (United). Delta Airlines (Delta) also submitted a letter 
expressing its general support for United's formal appeal. The 
appellants based their appeals on several aspects of the January 31 
final rule, most notably, the effective date of certain requirements in 
the rule, cost and availability of the required outer packaging, 
marking requirements, and thermal resistance testing. We also received 
requests for clarification of certain requirements of the final rule.
    In response to the appeals, we published a final rule on September 
28, 2007 (72 FR 55091) granting the request to delay the mandatory 
effective date for a new limit on PRD settings on cylinders containing 
compressed oxygen or other oxidizing gases transported on board 
aircraft from October 1, 2007 until October 1, 2008. We also clarified 
the thermal resistance test methods for packagings for oxygen cylinders 
and oxygen generators in Appendix D to Part 178, and added a new 
Appendix E to Part 178--Flame Penetration Resistance to incorporate the 
standards in Part III of Appendix F to 14 CFR Part 25, Test Method to 
Determine Flame Penetration Resistance of Cargo Compartment Liners 
Flame Penetration Resistance Test. In addition, we granted the request 
to include DOT specifications 3E seamless steel and 39 non-reusable 
(non-refillable) cylinders among the types of cylinders authorized for 
the transportation of compressed oxygen and other oxidizing gases 
aboard aircraft. Further, we provided a marking option to ensure easier 
identification of cylinders equipped with the new PRD and outer 
packagings meeting the flame penetration and thermal resistance 
requirements. Finally, in response to the concerns of appellants 
pertaining to the availability of the required packaging, we indicated 
that PHMSA and FAA would closely monitor the availability of the 
required packaging as the effective date (after September 30, 2009) of 
this provision approached and would consider an extension of the 
compliance date for this requirement if it was determined that a 
sufficient supply of the required outer packaging would not be 
available.

III. Petitions to the January 31, 2007 Final Rule

    PHMSA received petitions dated September 23, 2008 and April 21, 
2009 from the Council on Safe Transportation of Hazardous Articles, 
Inc. (COSTHA) pertaining to the mandatory compliance date for the 
required outer packaging. In its September 23, 2008 petition, COSTHA 
requested an extension of the compliance date until April 1, 2011 for 
the outer packaging requirement, and

[[Page 52898]]

also suggested that PHMSA permit the current use of non-rigid outer 
packagings meeting the requirements of ATA Spec 300 through April 1, 
2010. COSTHA argued that the additional time would ``allow packaging 
manufacturers to competitively introduce lightweight, durable, and 
affordable packaging with an anticipated long term safety benefit.'' 
PHMSA denied this petition, and in our response, reiterated our 
intention to monitor the availability and costs of the required outer 
packaging and to consider an extension of the compliance date for this 
requirement if it were determined that a sufficient supply of the 
required outer packaging would not be available as we approached the 
compliance date.
    In its petition dated April 21, 2009, COSTHA again requested the 
compliance date be extended to April 1, 2011 and suggested that the 
required outer packagings were currently not in production and would 
not be available in sufficient time to meet the October 1, 2009 
compliance date. COSTHA further requested that PHMSA re-evaluate the 
entire rulemaking based on its contention that the original regulatory 
evaluation developed in support of the final rule was ``significantly 
flawed and incomplete.'' We denied this petition based on our 
identification of a number of packaging manufacturers that are able to 
produce outer packagings that conform to the performance standards 
established in the January 31, 2007 final rule in quantities sufficient 
to meet expected demand by October 1, 2009. We based our conclusion on 
consultations with companies that are able to produce similar 
packaging, and on demonstrations presented to the Department by 
packaging manufacturers detailing development and production plans for 
the required packaging, supporting test documentation, cost estimates, 
and samples of their packaging prototypes.
    In addition, PHMSA and FAA attended a conference sponsored by 
American Airlines held in Tulsa, Oklahoma on March 10-11, 2009 for 
airline representative and packaging manufacturers to discuss issues 
pertaining to the HM-224B outer packaging requirements. At this 
meeting, eight (8) packaging manufacturers provided presentations that 
discussed the weight, cost, production lead-times, life expectancy, and 
production rate of the required outer packaging, with several 
manufactures providing production-ready prototypes. We also re-examined 
the regulatory evaluation developed in support of the final rule. We 
agreed with the petitioner that the regulatory evaluation 
underestimates the costs for outer packagings that conform to the 
performance standard established in the final rule. However, we also 
found that the evaluation significantly underestimates the expected 
life-span for such outer packagings. In addition, the regulatory 
evaluation overestimates the number of such packagings that would be 
required to accommodate air shipments of compressed oxygen and other 
oxidizing gases and chemical oxygen generators. Based on this re-
evaluation, we concluded that the costs associated with the requirement 
that outer packagings meet certain flame penetration and thermal 
resistance requirements when transported aboard aircraft are within the 
range of the costs estimated in the regulatory evaluation. Following 
our denial of COSTHA's second petition, we posted an advisory alert on 
our website confirming the mandatory compliance for the outer packaging 
requirement, and provided a contact list of packaging manufacturers who 
have indicated they are able to produce the required packaging.
    PHMSA also received a petition dated June 29, 2009 (P-1544) from 
Satair USA, Inc pertaining to the quantity limitation for packages of 
chemical oxygen generators. Currently, the HMR limits the total package 
weight (gross) of chemical oxygen generators to a maximum of 25 
kilograms when transported aboard cargo-aircraft only. This 25 kilogram 
gross limit includes the hazardous material and its outer packaging. In 
its petition, Satair contends that because of the additional weight of 
the more robust outer packaging required by the January 31, 2007 final 
rule, much of the 25 kilogram limit is utilized by the weight of the 
outer packaging thereby limiting the actual weight of the hazardous 
material to be transported. Satair states that if the 25 kilogram gross 
requirement remains in place, it will severely limit the quantity of 
items that may be shipped within each container. In its petition, 
Satair requested that we amend the HMR to revise the quantity 
limitation for packages of chemical oxygen generators transported 
aboard cargo aircraft only. We agree with the petitioner. During our 
monitoring of the availability of the required outer packaging and 
conversations with several packaging manufacturers, we agreed that the 
weight of the outer packaging material will be increased because of the 
additional thermal resistance and flame penetration requirements of the 
January 31, 2007 final rule, and thereby limits the amount of hazardous 
materials that can be transported. We believe that the allowable weight 
of chemical oxygen generators can be increased by revising the quantity 
limit from ``gross'' to ``net,'' in this direct final rule without 
sacrificing our intent of protecting a chemical oxygen generator 
exposed directly to flames from a fire or exposed indirectly to heat 
from a fire. Therefore, in this direct final rule, we are amending the 
HMR to revise the quantity limitation for packages of chemical oxygen 
generators transported aboard cargo aircraft only from 25 kilograms 
``gross'' to 25 kilograms ``net.'' We note that the revision applies to 
chemical oxygen generators transported by cargo-only aircraft, and that 
the transportation of chemical oxygen generators by passenger aircraft 
or rail continues to be prohibited.

IV. Summary of the Direct Final Rule

    Based on petitions received in response to the final rule and our 
own initiatives, we are adopting a requirement that quantities of 
chemical oxygen generators are limited to 25 kg net mass per package 
for transport aboard cargo-only aircraft. Any quantity of chemical 
oxygen generators transported aboard passenger aircraft or rail car 
remains prohibited.
    This direct final rule is issued under the procedures set forth in 
Sec.  106.40 of the HMR. Unless an adverse comment or notice of intent 
to file an adverse comment is received by November 16, 2009, this rule 
will become effective on November 16, 2009. An adverse comment explains 
why a rule would be inappropriate, or would be ineffective or 
unacceptable without a change. Under the direct final rule process, we 
do not consider a comment to be adverse that: (1) Recommends another 
rule change, in addition to the change in the direct final rule at 
issue, unless the commenter states why the rule would be ineffective 
without the change; or (2) is a frivolous or irrelevant comment. 
Therefore, comments that do not specifically address the 25 kg weight 
limitation for packages of chemical oxygen generators transported 
aboard cargo only aircraft will be considered beyond the scope of this 
rulemaking. PHMSA will publish in the Federal Register in a timely 
document confirming the effective date of this direct final rule.

V. Regulatory Analyses and Notices

A. Statutory/Legal Authority for Rulemaking

    This direct final rule is published under the authority of Federal 
hazardous materials transportation law

[[Page 52899]]

(Federal hazmat law; 49 U.S.C. 5101 et seq.) and 49 U.S.C. 44701. 
Section 5103(b) of Federal hazmat law authorizes the Secretary of 
Transportation to prescribe regulations for the safe transportation, 
including security, of hazardous material in intrastate, interstate, 
and foreign commerce. Section 1.53 of 49 CFR delegates the authority to 
issue regulations in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 5103(b) to the 
Administrator of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety 
Administration.

B. Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures

    This direct final rule is not considered a significant regulatory 
action under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 and, therefore, was 
not reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). This rule is 
not significant under the Regulatory Policies and Procedures of the 
Department of Transportation (44 FR 11034).
    In this direct final rule, we are amending the HMR to enhance 
safety and to offer greater flexibility in complying with the 
regulatory requirements for packages of chemical oxygen generators 
without sacrificing the current HMR level of safety. These amendments 
are based on petitions for rulemaking submitted by the regulated 
community and, for the most part, should reduce overall compliance 
costs. The amendment pertaining to the quantity limitation of chemical 
oxygen generators aboard cargo-only aircraft adopted in this direct 
final rule provides regulatory relief by raising the quantity threshold 
for such shipments.
    Overall this direct final rule will enhance transportation safety 
and reduce the overall compliance burden on the regulated industry.

C. Executive Order 13132

    This direct final rule has been analyzed in accordance with the 
principles and criteria contained in Executive Order 13132 
(``Federalism''). This direct final rule preempts State, local and 
Indian tribe requirements, but does not amend any regulation that has 
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.
    The Federal hazardous materials transportation law, 49 U.S.C. 5101-
5127, contains an express preemption provision (49 U.S.C. 5125(b)) that 
preempts State, local, and Indian tribe requirements on the following 
subjects:
    1. The designation, description, and classification of hazardous 
material;
    2. The packing, repacking, handling, labeling, marking, and 
placarding of hazardous material;
    3. The preparation, execution, and use of shipping documents 
related to hazardous material 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; and
    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 direct final rule addresses items 1, 2 and 5 above and 
preempts any State, local, or Indian tribe requirements not meeting the 
``substantially the same'' standard.
    Federal hazardous materials transportation law provides at Sec.  
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. 
This effective date of preemption is 90 days after the publication of 
this final rule in the Federal Register.

D. Executive Order 13175

    This direct 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 direct final rule will not have tribal implications, does 
not impose substantial direct compliance costs on Indian tribal 
governments, and does not preempt tribal law, the funding and 
consultation requirements of Executive Order 13084 do not apply, and a 
tribal summary impact statement is not required.

E. Regulatory Flexibility Act, Executive Order 13272, and DOT 
Procedures and Policies

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 requires an agency to review 
regulations to assess their impact on small entities unless the agency 
determines that a rule is not expected to have a significant impact on 
a substantial number of small entities. This direct final rule will not 
impose increased compliance costs on the regulated industry. The 
revisions, clarifications, and corrections we are making to the January 
31, 2007 final rule will provide regulatory relief to persons 
transporting chemical oxygen generators on aircraft by revising the 
quantity limitation for packages of chemical oxygen generators 
transported aboard cargo aircraft only. Accordingly, pursuant to the 
Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 605(b), DOT certifies that this 
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities.
    This direct final rule has been developed in accordance with 
Executive Order 13272 (``Proper Consideration of Small Entities in 
Agency Rulemaking'') and DOT's procedures and policies to promote 
compliance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act to ensure that potential 
impacts of draft rules on small entities are properly considered.

F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    This direct final rule does not impose unfunded mandates under the 
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995. It does not result in costs of 
$141,300,000 or more to either State, local or tribal governments, in 
the aggregate, or to the private sector, and is the least burdensome 
alternative that achieves the objective of the rule.

G. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This direct final rule imposes no new information collection and 
recordkeeping requirements.

H. 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 number contained in the heading 
of this document can be used to cross-reference this action with the 
Unified Agenda.

I. Environmental Assessment

    The National Environmental Policy Act, 42 U.S.C. 4321-4375, 
requires federal agencies to analyze proposed actions to determine 
whether the action will have a significant impact on the human 
environment. The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations 
order federal agencies to conduct an environmental review considering: 
(1) The need for the proposed action; (2) alternatives to the proposed 
action; (3) probable environmental impacts of the proposed action and 
alternatives; and (4) the

[[Page 52900]]

agencies and persons consulted during the consideration process. 40 CFR 
1508.9(b).
    The provisions of this direct final rule build on current 
regulatory requirements to enhance the safety and security of shipments 
of chemical oxygen generators when transported aboard an aircraft. The 
net environmental impact, therefore, will be moderately positive. There 
are no significant environmental impacts associated with this direct 
final rule.

J. Privacy Act

    Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all comments 
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual 
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf 
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's 
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on 
April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages 19477-78) or you may visit 
https://dms.dot.gov.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 172

    Education, Hazardous materials transportation, Hazardous waste, 
Labeling, Markings, Packaging and containers, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements.

0
In consideration of the foregoing, we are amending title 49 Chapter I, 
Subchapter C, as follows:

PART 172--HAZARDOUS MATERIALS TABLE, SPECIAL PROVISIONS, HAZARDOUS 
MATERIALS COMMUNICATIONS, EMERGENCY RESPONSE INFORMATION, AND 
TRAINING REQUIREMENTS, AND SECURITY PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for part 172 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101-5128, 44701; 49 CFR 1.53.


Sec.  172.101  [Amended]

0
2. In the Hazardous Materials Table, in Sec.  172.101, for the shipping 
name ``Oxygen generator, chemical (including when contained in 
associated equipment, e.g., passenger service units (PSUs), portable 
breathing equipment (PBE), etc),'' the entry in Column (9B), is revised 
to read ``25 kg''.

    Issued in Washington, DC on October 8, 2009 under authority 
delegated in 49 CFR part 106.
Cynthia Douglass,
Acting Deputy Administrator for Hazardous Materials Safety.
[FR Doc. E9-24779 Filed 10-14-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-60-P