Hazardous Materials: Enhanced Enforcement Procedures-Resumption of Transportation, 60755-60763 [2013-23894]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
determined by using a maximum wall
stress of 24,000 p.s.i. in the formula
described in paragraph (f)(4) of this
section.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 29. In § 178.345–3, paragraph (c)(1)
introductory text is revised to read as
follows:
§ 178.345–3
Structural integrity.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(1) Normal operating loadings. The
following procedure addresses stress in
the cargo tank shell resulting from
normal operating loadings. The effective
stress (the maximum principal stress at
any point) must be determined by the
following formula:
S = 0.5(Sy + Sx) ± [0.25(Sy ¥ Sx)2 +
SS2]0.5
(i.e., the vapor pressure of the filling
material and the partial pressure of the
air or other inert gas minus 100 kPa (15
psi)) at 55 °C (131 °F), multiplied by a
safety factor of 1.5. This total gauge
pressure must be determined on the
basis of a maximum degree of filling in
accordance with § 173.24a(d) of this
subchapter and a filling temperature of
15 °C (59 °F);
(2) Not less than 1.75 times the vapor
pressure at 50 °C (122 °F) of the material
to be transported minus 100 kPa (15
psi), but with a minimum test pressure
of 100 kPa (15 psig); or
(3) Not less than 1.5 times the vapor
pressure at 55 °C (131 °F) of the material
to be transported minus 100 kPa (15
psi), but with a minimum test pressure
of 100 kPa (15 psig).
*
*
*
*
*
Where:
PART 179—SPECIFICATIONS FOR
TANK CARS
*
*
*
*
*
■ 30. In § 178.503, paragraph (a)(1) is
revised to read as follows:
§ 178.503
32. The authority citation for part 179
is revised to read as follows:
■
Marking of packagings.
(a) * * *
(1) Except as provided in paragraph
(e)(1)(ii) of this section, the United
Nations symbol as illustrated in
paragraph (e)(1)(i) of this section (for
embossed metal receptacles, the letters
‘‘UN’’ may be applied in place of the
symbol);
*
*
*
*
*
■ 31. In § 178.605, paragraph (d) is
revised to read as follows:
§ 178.605
Hydrostatic pressure test.
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
*
*
*
*
*
(d) Test method and pressure to be
applied. Metal packagings and
composite packagings other than plastic
(e.g., glass, porcelain or stoneware),
including their closures, must be
subjected to the test pressure for 5
minutes. Plastic packagings and
composite packagings (plastic material),
including their closures, must be
subjected to the test pressure for 30
minutes. This pressure is the one to be
marked as required in § 178.503(a)(5).
The receptacles must be supported in a
manner that does not invalidate the test.
The test pressure must be applied
continuously and evenly, and it must be
kept constant throughout the test
period. In addition, packagings intended
to contain hazardous materials of
Packing Group I must be tested to a
minimum test pressure of 250 kPa (36
psig). The hydraulic pressure (gauge)
applied, taken at the top of the
receptacle, and determined by any one
of the following methods must be:
(1) Not less than the total gauge
pressure measured in the packaging
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:59 Oct 01, 2013
Jkt 232001
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101–5128; 49 CFR
1.81 and 1.97.
PART 180—CONTINUING
QUALIFICATION AND MAINTENANCE
OF PACKAGINGS
60755
Materials Transportation Safety
Improvement Act of 2012 related to the
Department’s enhanced inspection,
investigation, and enforcement
authority. Specifically, PHMSA is
amending the package opening
provision to include procedures for an
agent of the Secretary of Transportation
to open packages of perishable
hazardous materials and to provide
notification to the responsible party that
an agent has exercised a safety
inspection or investigation authority. In
addition, we are establishing equipment
requirements for agents. The
Department’s enhanced inspection,
investigation, and enforcement
procedures were previously established
through notice and comment
rulemaking and thoroughly address the
hazardous material transportation
matters identified by Congress. This
final rule is required to codify changes
to Federal hazardous materials
transportation law and to ensure
transparency and consistency for
hazardous materials inspectors across
all modes of transportation. As it affects
only agency enforcement procedures,
there are no additional compliance costs
to industry associated with this final
rule.
This Final rule is effective
November 1, 2013.
DATES:
33. The authority citation for part 180
is revised to read as follows:
■
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101–5128; 49 CFR
1.81 and 1.97.
Issued in Washington, DC, on September
25, 2013 under authority delegated in 49 CFR
part 1.97.
Cynthia L. Quarterman,
Administrator, Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration.
[FR Doc. 2013–23873 Filed 10–1–13; 8:45 am]
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Vincent Lopez or Shawn Wolsey, Office
of Chief Counsel, Pipeline and
Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, at
(202) 366–4400.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
BILLING CODE 4910–60–P
Table of Contents of Supplementary
Information
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
I. Executive Summary
II. Background
III. Discussion of the Comments on the
NPRM
IV. Summary of MAP–21 and Final Rule
V. Summary Review of Amendments
VI. Regulatory Analyses and Notices
A. Statutory/Legal Authority for This
Rulemaking
B. Executive Orders 12866, 13563, 13610,
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. Paperwork Reduction Act
G. Regulatory Identifier Number (RIN)
H. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
I. Environmental Assessment
J. Privacy Act
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials
Safety Administration
49 CFR Part 109
[Docket No. PHMSA–2012–0259 (HM–258B)]
RIN 2137–AE98
Hazardous Materials: Enhanced
Enforcement Procedures—Resumption
of Transportation
Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration
(PHMSA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
PHMSA is addressing certain
matters identified in the Hazardous
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00103
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM
02OCR1
60756
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
I. Executive Summary
On July 6, 2012, the President signed
the Moving Ahead for Progress in the
21st Century Act, or the MAP–21, which
included the Hazardous Materials
Transportation Safety Improvement Act
of 2012 (HMTSIA) as Title III of
Division C of the statute. Public Law
112–141, 126 Stat. 405, July 6, 2012.
Section 33009 of HMTSIA revised 49
U.S.C. 5121 to include a notification
requirement. Congress also directed the
Department to address certain
hazardous material (hazmat)
transportation matters through
rulemaking:
• The safe and expeditious
resumption of transportation of
perishable hazardous material,
including radiopharmaceuticals and
other medical products that may require
timely delivery due to life-threatening
situations;
• The means by which non-compliant
packages that present an imminent
hazard are placed out-of-service until
the condition is corrected;
• The means by which non-compliant
packages that do not present a hazard
are moved to their final destination;
• Appropriate training and
equipment for inspectors; and
• The proper closure of packaging in
accordance with the hazardous material
regulations.
We are clarifying in this rulemaking,
as described further below, the
Department’s position with respect to
perishable hazardous material, by
amending the opening of packages
provision of the Department’s hazardous
materials procedural regulations for the
opening of packages, for emergency
orders, and for emergency recalls. 49
CFR 109.5. The amendment recognizes
the special characteristics and handling
requirements of perishable hazardous
material by clarifying that an agent will
stop or open a package containing a
perishable hazardous material only after
the agent has utilized appropriate
alternatives. We are also codifying the
statutory notification requirement in
HMTSIA by incorporating into the
regulations the Department’s current
notification procedures from the
operations manual. Finally, we are
adding a new provision to address
appropriate equipment for inspectors.
For the remaining mandates to
address certain matters related to the
Department’s enhanced inspection,
investigation, and enforcement
authority, no additional regulatory
changes will be made. We believe that
the Department’s current rules that were
previously established through notice
and comment rulemaking and existing
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:59 Oct 01, 2013
Jkt 232001
policies and operating procedures
thoroughly address the hazmat
transportation matters identified by
Congress as requiring additional
regulations. For instance, in a prior
rulemaking, the Department established
procedural regulations for opening
packages, removing packages from
transportation, and closing packages in
part 109 of title 49, Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR). These regulations
include the definition of key terms,
including ‘‘perishable hazardous
material.’’ The regulations address how
the Department’s agents will handle
non-compliant packages that present an
imminent hazard and those that do not.
Moreover, the rules address when and
how the Department’s agents will open
a package. And, if an agent opens a
package, there are procedural rules for
closing the package and ensuring its safe
resumption of transportation, if
applicable. Specifically, under 49 CFR
109.13, if an imminent hazard is found
to exist after an agent opens a package,
the operating administration’s
authorized official may issue an out-ofservice order prohibiting the movement
of the package. The package must be
removed from transportation until it is
brought into compliance. An out-ofservice order is a type of emergency
order. The procedural regulations also
include procedures for administrative
review, reconsideration, and appellate
review of an out-of-service order. In
addition, the Department developed an
internal operations manual for training
and use by its hazmat inspectors and
investigators across all modes of
transportation. The operations manual’s
guidance is intended to target and
manage the use of the enhanced
inspection and enforcement authority in
a uniform and consistent manner within
the Department. At this time, we do not
have any data or other information that
indicate the rules, policies, and
operating procedures currently in place
are inadequate or that additional
regulations are necessary.
II. Background
On March 2, 2011, we issued a final
rule under Docket No. PHMSA–2005–
22356 (PHM–7), ‘‘Hazardous Materials:
Enhanced Enforcement Procedures.’’ 76
FR 11570. The final rule became
effective on May 2, 2011. The rule
implemented enhanced inspection,
investigation, and enforcement
authority conferred on the Secretary of
Transportation (Secretary) by the
Hazardous Materials Transportation
Safety and Security Reauthorization Act
of 2005 (HMTSSRA). The final rule
established procedures for issuance of
emergency orders (restrictions,
PO 00000
Frm 00104
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
prohibitions, recalls, and out-of-service
orders) to address unsafe conditions or
practices posing an imminent hazard;
opening of packages to identify
undeclared or non-compliant
shipments, when the person in
possession of the package refuses a
request to open it; and the temporary
detention and inspection of potentially
non-compliant packages. 76 FR 11570
(codified at 49 CFR part 109). In
conjunction with the final rule, the
Department of Transportation
(Department or DOT) developed an
internal operations manual for training
and use by its inspectors and
investigators (collectively agents). The
operations manual is a joint document
created by the operating administrations
that enforce the Hazardous Materials
Regulations, 49 CFR parts 171–180
(HMR),1 to provide guidance to agents
who, in the course of conducting
inspections, determine that they need to
open a package, remove a package from
transportation, or perform any other
function authorized in part 109. The
manual seeks to establish baseline
conditions that will ensure consistent
application of the authorities exercised
under 49 CFR part 109 at a minimum
threshold. The guidance is intended to
target and manage the use of enhanced
inspection and enforcement authority in
a manner that minimizes burdens on the
transportation system while, at the same
time, meets the overriding mission of
transportation safety. The operations
manual was made available to the
public on the PHMSA Web site,
https://www.phmsa.dot.gov.
On July 6, 2012, the President signed
the MAP–21, which included the
HMTSIA as Title III of Division C of the
statute. Section 33008 of HMTSIA
created a mandate for the Department to
develop uniform performance standards
for hazmat inspectors and investigators.
The standards shall be established as
1 Under authority delegated by the Secretary, the
Administrators of four agencies within DOT enforce
the Hazardous Materials Regulations, 49 CFR parts
171–180 and other regulations, approvals, special
permits, and orders issued under Federal hazardous
materials transportation law, 49 U.S.C. 5101 et seq.:
(1) Federal Aviation Administration, 49 CFR
1.83(d)(1); (2) Federal Railroad Administration, 49
CFR 1.89(j); (3) Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration, 49 CFR 1.87(d)(1); and (4) Pipeline
and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, 49
CFR 1.97(b). The Secretary has delegated authority
to the Administrator of each respective operating
administration to exercise the enhanced inspection
and enforcement authority conferred by HMTSSRA.
71 FR 52751, 52753 (Sept. 7, 2006). The United
States Coast Guard is authorized to enforce the
Hazardous Materials Regulations in connection
with certain transportation or shipment of
hazardous materials by water but does not have
Congressional/delegated authority to carry out the
enhanced inspection, investigation, and
enforcement authority.
E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM
02OCR1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
mandatory training guidelines in the
following areas:
• The collection, analysis, and
publication of findings from hazmat
accidents or incidents; and
• The identification of
noncompliance with the HMR, and the
initiation of appropriate enforcement
action.
See 126 Stat. at 836
Section 33009 of HMTSIA revised 49
U.S.C. 5121, to include a notification
requirement. Congress also directed the
Department to address certain hazmat
transportation matters through
rulemaking:
• The safe and expeditious
resumption of transportation of
perishable hazardous material,
including radiopharmaceuticals and
other medical products that may require
timely delivery due to life-threatening
situations;
• The means by which non-compliant
packages that present an imminent
hazard are placed out-of-service until
the condition is corrected;
• The means by which non-compliant
packages that do not present a hazard
are moved to their final destination;
• Appropriate training and
equipment for inspectors; and
• The proper closure of packaging in
accordance with the hazardous material
regulations.
See 126 Stat. at 836–7.
As described further below, we
believe that the Department’s current
rules that were previously established
through notice and comment
rulemaking and existing policies and
operating procedures thoroughly
address the congressional mandates to
address certain hazmat transportation
matters.
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
III. Discussion of Comments on the
NPRM
On May 22, 2013, we published a
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
dealing with these statutory mandates.
78 FR 30258. We received comments
from the National Association of
Chemical Distributors (NACD) and the
American Trucking Associations (ATA).
In this section we summarize and
discuss the NACD and ATA comments.
You may access the docket and the
comments and other documents in this
rulemaking by visiting the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at https://
www.regulations.gov, under Docket No.
PHMSA–2012–0259.
National Association of Chemical
Distributors (NACD)
NACD expressed its overall support
for the proposed rule’s focus on
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:59 Oct 01, 2013
Jkt 232001
clarifying the procedures related to the
Department’s hazardous materials
procedural regulations for the opening
of packages, for emergency orders, and
for emergency recalls. NACD believes
we should use this authority sparingly,
and as such, it supports our proposal to
establish a policy that Departmental
agents will not intentionally open
packages containing perishable
hazardous material unless a compelling
safety need exists. Furthermore, NACD
recommends that we extend the rule’s
proposed procedures to include
temperature-sensitive materials. NACD
asserts that its members frequently
transport materials that, although they
may not be completely perishable, are
temperature-sensitive. According to
NACD, the materials’ properties may
change and make the product less
effective if delayed and exposed to
extreme temperatures for a period of
time. This could result in substantial
negative impacts for its members and
their customers.
When we developed the definition for
‘‘perishable hazardous material,’’ we
envisioned etiological agents, such as
biological products, infectious
substances, medical waste, and toxins as
perishable commodities that will
require special handling. In response to
comments received during the PHM–7
rulemaking, we modified the definition
to include ‘‘hazardous materials
consigned for medical use.’’ We adopted
the modified definition because we
believed it was broad enough to capture
the types of hazardous material
requiring expedited handling as
prescribed by the statute. In MAP–21,
Congress reinforced that we had
correctly defined the term when it
identified ‘‘radiopharmaceuticals and
other medical products’’ as the types of
perishable hazardous materials
requiring special handling.
We note that the current definition of
‘‘perishable hazardous material’’
includes a ‘‘hazardous material that is
subject to significant risk of speedy
decay, deterioration, or spoilage.’’
NACD, in its comments, provided only
general information regarding
temperature-sensitive materials,
indicating they may not be completely
perishable. Moreover, it did not identify
specific materials of concern nor did it
provide any information on the rate of
decay, deterioration, or spoilage of any
temperature-sensitive materials. Based
on this limited information, it appears
the materials contemplated in NACD’s
comments are beyond the scope of this
rulemaking.
Nevertheless, we are mindful of the
concerns of NACD, and other industry
stakeholders, about unnecessary delays
PO 00000
Frm 00105
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
60757
that may occur when an agent exercises
one of the enhanced inspection,
investigation, and enforcement
authorities. It is important to note that
properly prepared packages will not be
opened by DOT agents because in the
final rule we have limited the scope of
the authority to open packages, to guard
against unwarranted opening and delay
and the unnecessary disruption of
commerce. Moreover, we believe the
definition of ‘‘perishable hazardous
material’’ and the rules, current
procedures, and guidance already
developed are adequate safeguards.
However, for additional clarity, we are
amending the opening of packages
provision of the Department’s hazardous
materials procedural regulations for the
opening of packages, for emergency
orders, and for emergency recalls as
proposed. The amendment recognizes
the special characteristics and handling
requirements of perishable hazardous
material by clarifying that an agent will
stop or open a package containing a
perishable hazardous material only after
the agent has utilized appropriate
alternatives.
American Trucking Associations (ATA)
ATA expressed its overall support of
our mission to safeguard the
transportation of hazardous materials
and indicated that it has a favorable
view our proposals for the handling of
perishable hazardous materials and
notice of enforcement measures.
However, ATA also made it clear that it
did not support our prior rulemaking,
PHM–7, in which we implemented the
enhanced inspection and investigation,
and enforcement authority. Moreover,
ATA believes the current rulemaking
suffers from many of the same perceived
deficiencies that it identified in the
comments it filed in the PHM–7
rulemaking. As such, ATA encourages
us to reconsider its previous comments
in the context of this rulemaking.
Further, ATA expresses a number of
concerns and recommendations. As a
preliminary matter, it is important to
note that we previously addressed the
significant concerns reiterated here by
ATA in the final rule in PHM–7. In that
rulemaking, we provided our analysis of
the comments received on the topics
presented by the commenters. We
therefore recommend that ATA, other
interested parties, and the public,
reexamine the PHM–7 final rule and our
comprehensive discussion of the
comments and our responses.
ATA presented numerous areas for
our consideration in its most recent
comments. However, as discussed
earlier, we have, in a previous
rulemaking, already addressed the
E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM
02OCR1
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
60758
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
significant concerns raised again by
ATA in its comments to this
rulemaking. Nevertheless, we feel it is
important to summarize the agency’s
positions on the significant concerns
raised, which include the scope of the
rule, liability for delays and injuries,
and the opening of packages.
The Scope of the Rule. ATA contends
that the enhanced inspection,
investigation, and enforcement
authority applies only to undeclared
hazmat shipments. However, as we
explained in our response to this
concern in the PHM–7 final rule, the
Department interprets the statute
broadly because the plain language of
the statute does not limit the
Department’s authority to undeclared
shipments. Moreover, the legislative
history indicates that Congress intended
to promote the Department’s authority
to ensure that hazardous materials
shipments are made in accordance with
the HMR. Still, in consideration of
commenters’ concerns regarding the
package opening authority, we
narrowed the scope of this authority by
limiting its use to only packages that
may contain hazardous material and are
not in compliance with the HMR or
Federal hazmat law. We said that
limiting this authority to packages that
may be non-compliant will guard
against unwarranted opening or delay of
declared packages that are in
compliance with the HMR. At this time,
we are unaware of any instances of
unwarranted package opening or delays.
Liability for Delays and Injuries. ATA
believes that the agency should be
responsible for curing any losses
incurred by the carrier related to late
deliveries of inspected packages or other
non-related packages that are part of the
same load. Further, ATA advocates
motor carrier liability protection from
damages that could result from injuries
sustained in opening packages. As we
noted it the PHM–7 final rule, liability
for delays is a contractual matter
between the motor carrier and the
shipper. As a Federal agency charged
with a safety mission, PHMSA does not
endeavor to regulate private contractual
matters between carriers and shippers.
Moreover, we do not expect the
Department to bear financial
responsibility for private costs related to
our exercise of these authorities. Under
the discretionary function exception,
the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA)
would bar any common law tort action
against the Department or operating
administration based on such activities.
See 28 U.S.C. 2680(a). For a more
information on this issue and the FTCA,
see our detailed discussion in the PHM–
7 NPRM. 73 FR 57287.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:59 Oct 01, 2013
Jkt 232001
The Opening of Packages. ATA
believes that opening packages during
transport is too risky. Although ATA’s
primary concern is presented in the
context of the packaging opening
authority, its comments implicate all of
the part 109 authorities, including the
removal from transportation, the
transportation for examination and
analysis, the assistance of properly
qualified personnel, the closing of
packages, and the safe resumption of
transportation. Fundamentally, ATA
believes that opening hazardous
materials packages should only occur in
a controlled environment, preferably at
the consignor’s or consignee’s facility,
and performed only by trained and
certified Federal agents wearing the
appropriate personal protective
equipment, and without any
involvement of the motor carrier’s
driver. ATA also suggests an alternative
inspection process with components
addressing these issues. For the
following reasons, we respectfully
disagree with ATA’s view of the
package opening authority.
First, we agree with ATA’s premise
that transporting hazardous materials is
inherently risky. And, as we stated in
the PHM–7 final rule, we agreed that
moving the inspection to the consignor/
consignee’s facility, if practicable, may
be beneficial if it can be accomplished
safely. Also, it is worth reiterating that,
in practice, the location of inspections
has not changed since we implemented
this authority. All enforcement activities
have continued to proceed as they have
in the past. The package opening
authority is merely an extra compliance
inspection tool for DOT agents, but the
premise for conducting inspections, the
locations at which they are conducted,
and the regulations under which the
industry must comply remained
unchanged. Additionally, we note that
the proposed changes in the current
rulemaking align with ATA’s other
concerns and recommendations, which
include appropriate equipment for
inspectors and notice of enforcement
measures to affected parties.
Next, we again point to our discussion
of the comments we received in the
PHM–7 rulemaking. For example, in the
PHM–7 final rule, we provided detailed
explanations of each of the part 109
authorities and the issues raised by the
commenters, and our responses. During
that rulemaking, many commenters
expressed many of the same concerns
regarding the package opening authority
that ATA has expressed here.
Accordingly, we took measures to
implement the enhanced inspection and
investigation, and enforcement
authority with appropriate safeguards
PO 00000
Frm 00106
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
that control risk and minimize burdens
on the transportation system, while at
the same time, meeting the
Department’s overriding mission of
transportation safety.
Last, the safety standards mandated
by the Department and the HMR are risk
controls that provide a high degree of
protection. We believe the enhanced
inspection, investigation, and
enforcement authority and the
procedures being codified by this final
rule are necessary risk controls. At this
time, we do not have any data or other
information that indicate the rules,
policies, and operating procedures
currently in place are inadequate or that
addition regulations, other than those
proposed here, are necessary.
In light of the above, we intend to
proceed with the amendments and
additions to the Department’s hazardous
materials procedural regulations for the
opening of packages, for emergency
orders, and for emergency recalls, as
proposed in the NPRM.
IV. Summary of MAP–21 and Final
Rule
In MAP–21 Congress directed the
Secretary to address certain
transportation matters related to the
Department’s enhanced inspection,
investigation, and enforcement
authority. The relevant MAP–21
mandates for this rulemaking are:
• Notice of enforcement measures;
• The safe and expeditious
resumption of transportation of
perishable hazardous material,
including radiopharmaceuticals and
other medical products that may require
timely delivery due to life-threatening
situations;
• The means by which non-compliant
packages that present an imminent
hazard are placed out-of-service until
the condition is corrected;
• The means by which non-compliant
packages that do not present a hazard
are moved to their final destination;
• Appropriate training and
equipment for inspectors; and
• The proper closure of packaging in
accordance with the hazardous material
regulations.
We are clarifying in this rulemaking,
as described further below, the
Department’s position with respect to
perishable hazardous material, by
amending the opening of packages
provision of the Department’s hazardous
materials procedural regulations for the
opening of packages, for emergency
orders, and for emergency recalls. The
amendment recognizes the special
characteristics and handling
requirements of perishable hazardous
material by clarifying that an agent will
E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM
02OCR1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
stop or open a package containing a
perishable hazardous material only after
the agent has utilized appropriate
alternatives. We are also codifying the
statutory notification requirement in
HMTSIA by incorporating into the
regulations the Department’s current
notification procedures from the
operations manual that was developed
in conjunction with the PHM–7 final
rule. Finally, we are adding a new
provision to address appropriate
equipment for inspectors.
For the remaining mandates to
address certain matters related to the
Department’s enhanced inspection,
investigation, and enforcement
authority, no additional regulatory
changes will be made. We believe that
the Department’s current rules that were
previously established through notice
and comment rulemaking and existing
policies and operating procedures
thoroughly address the hazmat
transportation matters identified by
Congress. In PHM–7, the Department
established regulations in part 109 to
provide procedures for opening
packages, removing packages from
transportation, and closing packages.
These regulations include the definition
of key terms, including perishable
hazardous material. The regulations
address how the Department’s agents
will handle non-compliant packages
that present an imminent hazard and
those that do not. Moreover, the rules
address when and how the
Department’s agents will open a
package. And, if an agent opens a
package, there are procedural rules for
closing the package and ensuring its safe
resumption of transportation, if
applicable. In addition, the Department
developed an internal operations
manual for training and use by its
hazmat inspectors and investigators
across all modes of transportation. The
operations manual’s guidance is
intended to target and manage within
the Department the use of the enhanced
inspection and enforcement authority in
a uniform and consistent manner. At
this time, we do not have any data or
other information that indicate the
rules, policies, and operating
procedures currently in place are
inadequate or that additional
rulemaking is necessary.
Notice of Enforcement Measures
In PHM–7, we established procedures
to implement the enhanced inspection,
investigation, and enforcement
authority conferred on the Secretary
through HMTSSRA. In the NPRM for
that rule, in response to commenters’
concerns about notifying offerors and
consignees about a possible delay in
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:59 Oct 01, 2013
Jkt 232001
arrival, we agreed that all parties
responsible for a shipment that is
opened or removed from transportation
need to be notified of the action taken.
We said that ‘‘DOT inspectors will be
required to communicate the findings
made and enforcement measures taken
to the appropriate offeror, recipient, and
carrier of the package * * *’’. 73 FR
57288. In the final rule, we outlined
how we would notify affected parties
when an agent exercises one of the new
authorities. 76 FR 11580. In the
preamble to the final rule, we explained
that the notification procedures would
be incorporated into the Department’s
joint operations manual. Id. The
notification procedures that we
developed for the joint operations
manual address situations where an
agent may exercise a 49 CFR part 109
authority for a package that is in transit.
In this case, the person in possession of
the package, such as a carrier, may not
be the person responsible for the
package, i.e., the offeror. Therefore, we
set out separate procedures for
immediately notifying the person in
possession and the original offeror.
Generally, the agent will verbally notify
the person in possession. If the person
in possession is not the original offeror,
the agent will also take reasonable
measures to notify the original offeror.
In MAP–21 Congress added a
notification requirement to the
Department’s inspection and
investigation authority. Under this
mandate, an agent shall provide to the
affected person reasonable notice of the
agent’s exercise of authority, any
findings made, and any actions being
taken for noncompliance. See 126 Stat.
at 836–7.
We are codifying in this final rule the
statutory notification requirement by
incorporating into the regulations the
Department’s current notification
procedures from the joint operations
manual. As discussed above, the joint
operations manual includes procedures
and guidance to agents for providing
notice of enforcement measures taken
under 49 CFR part 109. The procedures
in the manual are comprehensive and
comport with the statutory mandate. As
such, a new notification section will be
added to part 109, subpart B of 49 CFR.
It will require that an agent, after
exercising a 49 CFR part 109 inspection
or investigation authority, immediately
take reasonable measures to notify the
appropriate person of the reason for the
action being taken, the results of any
preliminary investigation including
apparent violations of the HMR, and any
further action that may be warranted.
PO 00000
Frm 00107
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
60759
The Safe and Expeditious Resumption
of Transportation of Perishable
Hazardous Material
We addressed the opening, reclosing,
and resumption of transportation of
perishable hazardous material in a
previous rulemaking. In PHM–7, we
defined ‘‘perishable hazardous
material’’ as ‘‘a hazardous material that
is subject to significant risk of speedy
decay, deterioration, or spoilage, or
hazardous materials consigned for
medical use, in the prevention,
treatment, or cure of a disease or
condition in human beings or animals
where expeditious shipment and
delivery meets a critical medical need.’’
76 FR 11592 (codified at 49 CFR 109.1).
Further, we established procedures for
reclosing a package containing a
perishable hazardous material and its
safe and expeditious resumption of
transportation. Section 109.13 contains
the requirements for the closing of
packages and the safe resumption of
transportation, including a specific
requirement pertaining to perishable
hazardous material.
We believe the definition of
‘‘perishable hazardous material’’ and the
rules, current procedures, and guidance
already developed for reclosing
packages, sufficiently address Congress’
concern and the need for expeditious
treatment of these types of materials. We
also note that in the Department’s joint
operations manual, we have
significantly restricted an agent’s ability
to handle or open a package containing
perishable hazardous material. For
example, an agent must have been
trained in the handling of the specific
material and may only open a
perishable hazardous material package
in a designated facility, if required, and
have all safety equipment, handling
equipment, and materials to properly
close the package. Notwithstanding
these restrictions, in order to clarify the
Department’s position with respect to
perishable hazardous materials, we are
amending the opening of packages
provision of the Department’s hazardous
materials procedural regulations for the
opening of packages, for emergency
orders, and for emergency recalls. The
amendment recognizes the special
characteristics and handling
requirements of perishable hazardous
material by clarifying that an agent will
stop or open a package containing a
perishable hazardous material only after
the agent has utilized appropriate
alternatives.
Handling of Non-Compliant Packages
In MAP–21 Congress mandated that
the Department take all actions
E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM
02OCR1
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
60760
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
necessary to finalize a regulation
addressing the means by which noncompliant packages are processed when
an agent exercises an authority under
part 109. Per 126 Stat. 837, the matters
to be addressed include how packages
that present an imminent hazard are
placed out-of-service, until corrected,
and the means by which noncompliant
packages that do not present a hazard
are moved to their final destination.
The Department’s procedural rules for
opening of packages, for emergency
orders, and for emergency recalls are in
49 CFR part 109. These procedures
address the means by which a noncompliant package that is found to be an
imminent hazard is placed out-ofservice. Specifically, in 49 CFR 109.13,
if an imminent hazard is found to exist
after an agent opens a package, the
operating administration’s authorized
official may issue an out-of-service
order prohibiting the movement of the
package. 49 CFR 109.13(b). The package
must be removed from transportation
until it is brought into compliance. Id.
An out-of-service order is a type of
emergency order. 49 CFR 109.1. Subpart
C of part 109 contains the procedural
regulations for issuing an out-of-service
order and procedures for administrative
review, reconsideration, and appellate
review of an emergency order. For
example, a recipient of an out-of-service
order may appeal the order to PHMSA’s
Chief Safety Officer, under 49 CFR
109.17(b)(4), pursuant to procedures in
49 CFR 109.19. Furthermore, the joint
operations manual provides inspection
personnel with step-by-step procedures
and additional guidance for issuing an
out-of-service order. For example, at
least two levels of review and
consultation with the operating
administration’s legal office is required
before an emergency order may be
issued. Moreover, the operations
manual addresses documentation
requirements, notification, service,
publication, and termination
requirements.
It is important to note that a noncompliant package that does not present
a hazard may not continue in
transportation until all identified noncompliant issues are resolved. 49 CFR
109.13(d). In the PHM–7 final rule
where we established the enhanced
enforcement procedures, we stated that
for a non-compliant package, the agent
would not close the package and that
there is no obligation to bring that
package into compliance. 76 FR 11587.
Further, we stated, ‘‘[t]he Department’s
operating administrations will not be
responsible for bringing an otherwise
non-compliant package into compliance
and resuming its movement in
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:59 Oct 01, 2013
Jkt 232001
commerce.’’ Id. We reasoned that if the
package does not conform to the HMR
at the time of inspection, the fact that a
DOT official opened it in the course of
an inspection or investigation will not
make DOT or its agent responsible for
bringing the package into compliance.
Id.
In light of the above, we have already
fulfilled the applicable mandate for the
handling of non-compliant packages
and no further action is required.
Appropriate Training and Equipment
for Inspectors
Congress recognized that ‘‘[t]here is
currently no uniform training standard
for hazardous materials (‘hazmat’)
inspectors and investigators.’’ H. Conf.
Rep. No. 112–557 at 610 (2012). To
address this problem, it mandated in
MAP–21 that the Secretary establish
uniform performance standards for
training hazmat inspectors and
investigators no later than eighteen
months from the date of enactment of
the Act. 126 Stat. at 836. The mandate
authorizes the development of
guidelines for hazmat inspector and
investigator qualifications; best
practices and standards for hazmat
inspector and investigator training
programs; and standard protocols to
coordinate investigation efforts among
Federal, State, and local jurisdictions on
accidents or incidents involving the
transportation of hazardous material. In
order to achieve a uniform hazmat
training standard, Congress required
that the standards, protocols, and
guidelines developed would be
mandatory to the Department’s
multimodal personnel conducting
hazmat enforcement inspections and
investigations.
Additionally, Congress mandated that
the Department take all actions
necessary to finalize a regulation, no
later than one year from the date of
enactment of the Act, addressing
appropriate training and equipment for
inspectors when exercising an authority
under 49 CFR part 109. See 126 Stat. at
837.
Although the MAP–21 mandates here
are training related, it is evident that the
development of a uniform training
scheme is essential because it will
establish the foundation upon which
future training for hazmat inspectors
and investigators is based. As such, it is
premature to require the Department to
promulgate enforcement procedural
regulations for hazmat training and
equipment before the Department has
had the opportunity to develop uniform
performance training standards. This
approach does not appear to be the best
way to meet Congress’ objective to
PO 00000
Frm 00108
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
ensure that all hazmat inspectors and
investigations receive uniform and
standardized training. It would be more
appropriate for the Department to
establish the uniform performance
training standards, best practices, and
protocols before it develops additional
training regulations for its hazmat
personnel. This would ensure that new
training rules are consistent with the
uniform training scheme.
Notwithstanding the discussion
above, we understand that proper
training of inspectors and investigators
is essential to ensure that the enhanced
enforcement authority is used
effectively and judiciously. In the
NPRM for PHM–7, we explained that
the operating administrations
responsible for enforcement of the
HMR—PHMSA, FMCSA, FAA, and
FRA—worked together to develop the
rule and a joint operations manual. 73
FR 57285. We further explained that the
proposed regulations set out a
framework for the procedures the
operating administrations will employ
when conducting inspections or
investigations, thus ensuring
consistency in approaches and
enforcement measures among modes of
transportation. Moreover, we stated that
the final rule, implemented with the
guidance of an operational manual,
would ensure that this authority was
properly used. Id. We expressed our
confidence in this approach because
with the cooperation of the operating
administrations in the development of
the rule, and the accompanying
operations manual, it meant that all
Department inspectors and investigators
would have the same general training
and modal specific instruction. 73 FR
57288.
Regarding equipment, we are adding
a new provision to address appropriate
equipment for inspectors when they
exercise a part 109 authority. A new
equipment section will be added to new
Subpart D—Equipment, requiring an
agent to use the appropriate safety,
handling, and other equipment
authorized by his or her operating
administration’s equipment
requirements for hazardous material
inspectors and investigators.
Consequently, we do not believe that
we should develop rules for appropriate
training in this rulemaking. Instead, we
advocate addressing any performance
standards as part of the larger hazardous
materials performance standard
development activity currently
underway. In the meantime, we believe
the existing rules in 49 CFR part 109
and the attendant operational
procedures in the joint operations
manual, as well as each operating
E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM
02OCR1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
administration’s specific guidance for
its enforcement staff, sufficiently
address the training concern identified
by Congress in the MAP–21 directive.
Therefore, PHMSA does not believe that
further action is necessary at this time.
The Proper Closure of Packaging in
Accordance With HMR
In MAP–21 Congress mandated that
the Department take all actions
necessary to finalize a regulation
addressing ‘‘the proper closure of
packaging in accordance with the
hazardous material regulations.’’ 126
Stat. at 837.
In PHM–7 we addressed reclosing of
packages opened under the enhanced
inspection, investigation, and
enforcement authority. In several of the
comments in response to that
rulemaking, the regulated community
raised concerns about how we were
going to reclose packages after they have
been opened under the new authority.
We responded by stating that the
Department was developing internal
operational procedures and guidance to
address the proper closure of packaging
in accordance with the HMR. We also
solicited further comment from the
public on the factors that should be
considered in the development of these
procedures and guidance. 73 FR 57286.
However, we also stated that an agent’s
obligation to reclose a package only
arose if, after opening the package, an
imminent hazard was found not to exist
and the package otherwise complied
with the HMR. 76 FR 11587. More
importantly, we also said that the
Department’s operating administrations
would not be responsible for bringing an
otherwise non-specification or noncompliant package into compliance and
resuming its movement in commerce.
Id. If the package did not comply with
the HMR, the fact that a DOT official
opened it in the course of an inspection
or investigation would not make DOT or
its inspector responsible for bringing the
package into compliance. Id. In the final
rule, we significantly revised the new
rule for closing packages to cover each
possible re-closure scenario: no
imminent hazard found; imminent
hazard found; package does not contain
a hazardous material; and package
contains a hazardous material not in
compliance with the HMR. Id. Further,
we stated that the inspector would only
be required to reclose a package in
accordance with the packaging
manufacturer’s closure instructions or
other appropriate method when a
package was opened and no imminent
hazard was found. Id. In the joint
operations manual we developed
procedures for properly closing a
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:59 Oct 01, 2013
Jkt 232001
package. These procedures include
steps for reclosing a package. It also
includes additional requirements and
procedures to complete the re-closure
process, including methods to
thoroughly document the activities
performed.
In light of the above, we believe the
existing requirements in 49 CFR part
109 for closing opened packages
(§ 109.13) and the attendant operational
procedures in the joint operations
manual sufficiently address the matter
identified by Congress in the MAP–21
directive. Therefore, no further action is
necessary.
V. Summary Review of Amendments
In this final rule we are amending the
opening of packages provision of the
Department’s hazardous materials
procedural regulations for the opening
of packages, for emergency orders, and
for emergency recalls. The amendment
recognizes the special characteristics
and handling requirements of perishable
hazardous material by clarifying that an
agent will stop or open a package
containing a perishable hazardous
material only after the agent has utilized
appropriate alternatives. We are also
adding a notification provision to part
109, Subpart B—Inspections and
Investigations. The provision will
provide for the immediate and
reasonable notification of enforcement
action taken by an inspector or
investigator whenever he or she
exercises one of the inspection and
investigation authorities under part 109,
subpart B, which includes the opening
of packages; removing a package and
related packages in a shipment from
transportation; directing a package to be
transported to a facility for examination
and analysis; and authorizing properly
qualified personnel to assist in activities
conducted under subpart B. The notice
will include the reason for the action
being taken, the results of any
preliminary investigation including
apparent violations of the HMR, and any
further action that may be warranted.
Finally, we are adding a new provision
to address appropriate equipment for
inspectors when they exercise a part 109
authority. The new equipment section
will be added to part 109 under new
Subpart D—Equipment. The provision
will require an agent to use the
appropriate safety, handling, and other
equipment authorized by his or her
operating administration’s equipment
requirements for hazardous material
inspectors and investigators.
PO 00000
Frm 00109
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
60761
VI. Regulatory Analyses and Notices
A. Statutory/Legal Authority for This
Rulemaking
This final rule is published under the
authority of the Federal hazardous
materials transportation law, 49 U.S.C.
5101 et seq. Section 5103(b) authorizes
the Secretary to prescribe regulations for
the safe transportation, including
security, of hazardous material in
intrastate, interstate, and foreign
commerce. This final rule would revise
the Department’s procedural regulations
for opening of packages, for emergency
orders, and for emergency recalls to
address certain matters identified in the
Hazardous Materials Transportation
Safety Act of 2012 related to
Department’s enhanced inspection,
investigation, and enforcement
authority. The final rule carries out the
statutory mandate and clarifies DOT’s
role and responsibilities in ensuring that
hazardous materials are being safely
transported and promoting the regulated
community’s understanding and
compliance with regulatory
requirements applicable to specific
situations and operations.
B. Executive Orders 12866, 13563,
13610, and DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures
This 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). The final rule is not considered
a significant rule under the Regulatory
Policies and Procedures order issued by
the U.S. Department of Transportation
(44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979).
Executive Order 13563 is
supplemental to and reaffirms the
principles, structures, and definitions
governing regulatory review that were
established in Executive Order 12866
Regulatory Planning and Review of
September 30, 1993. Executive Order
13563, issued January 18, 2011, notes
that our nation’s current regulatory
system must not only protect public
health, welfare, safety, and our
environment but also promote economic
growth, innovation, competitiveness,
and job creation (76 FR 3821, January
21, 2011). Further, this executive order
urges government agencies to consider
regulatory approaches that reduce
burdens and maintain flexibility and
freedom of choice for the public. In
addition, Federal agencies are asked to
periodically review existing significant
regulations, retrospectively analyze
rules that may be outmoded, ineffective,
insufficient, or excessively burdensome,
and modify, streamline, expand, or
E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM
02OCR1
60762
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
repeal regulatory requirements in
accordance with what has been learned.
Executive Order 13610, issued May
10, 2012, urges agencies to conduct
retrospective analyses of existing rules
to examine whether they remain
justified and whether they should be
modified or streamlined in light of
changed circumstances, including the
rise of new technologies (77 FR 28469,
May 14, 2012).
By building off of each other, these
three Executive Orders require agencies
to regulate in the ‘‘most cost-effective
manner,’’ to make a ‘‘reasoned
determination that the benefits of the
intended regulation justify its costs,’’
and to develop regulations that ‘‘impose
the least burden on society.’’
This final rule augments 49 CFR part
109, which contains regulations on DOT
inspection and investigation
procedures. These regulations are not
part of the HMR, which governs the
transportation of hazardous materials,
thus they do not carry any additional
compliance requirements or costs for
entities that must comply with the
HMR. The benefits of the rule are that
the procedures being incorporated are
transparent to the regulated community,
and ensure that the shipper is notified
of an enforcement action. This will
eliminate any suspicion of malice on the
part of the agency or any specific
inspector, and provide information to
the shipper that could be used to modify
any remaining defective operations that
led to the removal. Also, the operations
manual ensures that DOT’s procedures
are consistent across all modes.
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
C. Executive Order 13132
This final rule has been analyzed in
accordance with the principles and
criteria contained in Executive Order
13132 (‘‘Federalism’’). 49 U.S.C. 5125(h)
provides that the preemption provisions
in Federal hazardous material
transportation law do ‘‘not apply to any
procedure * * * utilized by a State,
political subdivision of a State, or
Indian tribe to enforce a requirement
applicable to the transportation of
hazardous material.’’ Accordingly, this
final rule has no preemptive effect on
State, local, or Indian tribe enforcement
procedures and penalties.
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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:59 Oct 01, 2013
Jkt 232001
substantial direct compliance costs, the
funding and consultation requirements
of Executive Order 13175 do not apply.
E. Regulatory Flexibility Act, Executive
Order 13272, and DOT Procedures and
Policies
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 that a rule is not expected to
have significant impact on a substantial
number of small entities. I hereby certify
that the final rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
This final rule applies to offerors and
carriers of hazardous materials, some of
which are small entities; however, there
will not be any economic impact on any
person who complies with Federal
hazardous materials law and the
regulations and orders issued under that
law.
Potentially affected small entities. The
provisions in this final rule will apply
to persons who perform, or cause to be
performed, functions related to the
transportation of hazardous materials in
transportation in commerce. This
includes offerors of hazardous materials
and persons in physical control of a
hazardous material during
transportation in commerce. Such
persons may primarily include motor
carriers, air carriers, vessel operators,
rail carriers, temporary storage facilities,
and intermodal transfer facilities.
Unless alternative definitions have been
established by the agency in
consultation with the Small Business
Administration, the definition of ‘‘small
business’’ has the same meaning as
under the Small Business Act (15 CFR
parts 631–657c). Therefore, since no
such special definition has been
established, PHMSA employs the
thresholds (published in 13 CFR
121.201) of 1,500 employees for air
carriers (North American Industry
Classification System [NAICS] Subgroup
481), 500 employees for rail carriers
(NAICS Subgroup 482), 500 employees
for vessel operators (NAICS Subgroup
483), $18.5 million in revenues for
motor carriers (NAICS Subgroup 484),
and $18.5 million in revenues for
warehousing and storage companies
(NAICS Subgroup 493). Of the
approximately 116,000 entities to which
this final rule applies (104,000 of which
are motor carriers), we estimate that
about 90 percent are small entities.
Potential cost impacts. This final rule
revises 49 CFR part 109, which contains
regulations on DOT inspection and
investigation procedures. These
regulations are not part of the HMR,
PO 00000
Frm 00110
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
which govern the transportation of
hazmat, thus they do not carry any
additional compliance requirements or
costs for entities that must comply with
the HMR.
Alternate proposals for small
business. Because this final rule
addresses a Congressional mandate, we
have limited latitude in defining
alternative courses of action. The option
of taking no action would be both
inconsistent with Congress’ direction
and undesirable from the standpoint of
safety and enforcement. Failure to
implement these amendments will
perpetuate the problem of undeclared
hazardous material shipments and
resulting incidents or releases. It will
also leave PHMSA and other operating
administrations without an effective
plan to abate an imminent safety hazard.
F. Paperwork Reduction Act
PHMSA has analyzed this final rule in
accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA). The PRA
requires Federal agencies to minimize
the paperwork burden imposed on the
American public by ensuring maximum
utility and quality of federal
information, ensuring the use of
information technology to improve
government performance, and
improving the Federal government’s
accountability for managing information
collection activities. This final rule
contains no new information collection
requirements subject to the PRA.
G. Regulatory Identifier Number (RIN)
A regulatory 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 crossreference this action with the Unified
Agenda.
H. 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
$141.3 million 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.
I. Environmental Assessment
The National Environmental Policy
Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended (42
U.S.C. 4321–4347), and implementing
regulations by the Council on
Environmental Quality (40 CFR part
E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM
02OCR1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 2, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
1500) require Federal agencies to
consider the consequences of Federal
actions and prepare a detailed statement
on actions that significantly affect the
quality of the human environment.
The purpose of this rulemaking is to
amend the Department’s existing
enforcement procedures to (1) to clarify
the Department’s position with respect
to perishable hazardous material, by
amending the opening of packages
provision; (2) provide notice of
enforcement measures to affected
parties; and (3) address appropriate
equipment for inspectors. Because this
final rule addresses Congressional
mandates, we have limited latitude in
defining alternative courses of action.
The option of taking no action would be
both inconsistent with Congress’
direction and undesirable from the
standpoint of safety and enforcement.
PHMSA sought comment on the
environmental assessment in the NPRM.
PHMSA did not receive any comments
regarding the environmental assessment
contained in that rulemaking. This
action has been thoroughly reviewed by
PHMSA. Given that the inspection and
enforcement procedures in this final
rule will not change the current
inspection procedures for DOT, but will
provide transparency into our existing
operations and procedures, PHMSA
concludes that the rule will not result in
significant environmental impacts.
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) which
may be viewed at: https://www.gpo.gov/
fdsys/pkg/FR-2000-04-11/pdf/008505.pdf.
PART 109—DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION HAZARDOUS
MATERIALS PROCEDURAL
REGULATIONS FOR OPENING OF
PACKAGES, FOR EMERGENCY
ORDERS, AND FOR EMERGENCY
RECALLS
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials
Safety Administration
2. In § 109.5, paragraph (a)
introductory text is revised, and
paragraph (b) is added to read as
follows:
[Docket No. PHMSA–2013–0205; Notice No.
13–14]
■
§ 109.5
Opening of packages.
(a) In general. Except as provided in
paragraph (b):
*
*
*
*
*
(b) Perishable hazardous material. To
ensure the expeditious transportation of
a package containing a perishable
hazardous material, an agent will utilize
appropriate alternatives before
exercising an authority under paragraph
(a) of this section.
3. Add § 109.16 to subpart B as
follows:
■
§ 109.16 Notification of enforcement
measures.
In addition to complying with the
notification requirements in § 109.7 of
this part, an agent, after exercising an
authority under this Subpart, will
immediately take reasonable measures
to notify the offeror and the person in
possession of the package, providing the
reason for the action being taken, the
results of any preliminary investigation
including apparent violations of
subchapter C of this chapter, and any
further action that may be warranted.
4. Add subpart D, consisting of
§ 109.25, to read as follows:
■
§ 109.25
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
15:59 Oct 01, 2013
Jkt 232001
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101–5128, 44701;
Pub. L. 101–410 Sec. 4 (28 U.S.C. 2461 note);
Pub. L. 104–121 Secs. 212–213; Pub. L. 104–
134 Sec. 31001; 49 CFR 1.81, 1.97.
Equipment, Inspections and
investigations.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
[FR Doc. 2013–23894 Filed 10–1–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–60–P
1. The authority citation for part 109
is revised to read as follows:
Subpart D—Equipment
In consideration of the foregoing, part
109 of chapter I, subtitle B of title 49 of
the Code of Federal Regulations is
amended as follows:
Issued in Washington, DC, on September
26, 2013 under authority delegated in 49 CFR
1.97.
Timothy P. Butters,
Deputy Administrator, Pipeline and
Hazardous Materials Safety Administration.
■
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 109
The Final Rule
60763
Equipment.
When an agent exercises an authority
under subpart B of this part, the agent
shall use the appropriate safety,
handling, and other equipment
authorized by his or her operating
administration’s equipment
requirements for hazardous material
inspectors and investigators.
PO 00000
Frm 00111
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
49 CFR Part 173
Clarification on Fireworks Policy
Regarding Approvals or Certifications
for Firework Series
Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration
(PHMSA), DOT.
ACTION: Clarification.
AGENCY:
This notice clarifies PHMSA’s
policy regarding applications for
firework device series. PHMSA has
required separate applications for each
individual firework device. Often one
firework device has identical hazardous
properties to another firework device
that is intended to produce a similar
result in a firework display. These
similar firework devices are considered
part of a series of firework devices. In
this document, we are clarifying our
policy to accept certain fireworks series
applications.
DATES: October 2, 2013.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Ryan Paquet, Director, Approvals and
Permits Division, Office of Hazardous
Materials Safety, (202) 366–4512,
PHMSA, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
I. Introduction
In this notice, PHMSA’s Office of
Hazardous Materials Safety (OHMS) is
issuing its policy regarding firework
device series applications, which details
the categories of fireworks for which
PHMSA firework series applications
may be permitted, and the criteria
necessary to be considered a firework
series. PHMSA believes that by issuing
fireworks approvals or certifications to
firework device series, the application
backlog will be reduced, the current
level of safety will be sustained, and
firework series will reach the market
faster.
E:\FR\FM\02OCR1.SGM
02OCR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 191 (Wednesday, October 2, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 60755-60763]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-23894]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
49 CFR Part 109
[Docket No. PHMSA-2012-0259 (HM-258B)]
RIN 2137-AE98
Hazardous Materials: Enhanced Enforcement Procedures--Resumption
of Transportation
AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA),
DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: PHMSA is addressing certain matters identified in the
Hazardous Materials Transportation Safety Improvement Act of 2012
related to the Department's enhanced inspection, investigation, and
enforcement authority. Specifically, PHMSA is amending the package
opening provision to include procedures for an agent of the Secretary
of Transportation to open packages of perishable hazardous materials
and to provide notification to the responsible party that an agent has
exercised a safety inspection or investigation authority. In addition,
we are establishing equipment requirements for agents. The Department's
enhanced inspection, investigation, and enforcement procedures were
previously established through notice and comment rulemaking and
thoroughly address the hazardous material transportation matters
identified by Congress. This final rule is required to codify changes
to Federal hazardous materials transportation law and to ensure
transparency and consistency for hazardous materials inspectors across
all modes of transportation. As it affects only agency enforcement
procedures, there are no additional compliance costs to industry
associated with this final rule.
DATES: This Final rule is effective November 1, 2013.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Vincent Lopez or Shawn Wolsey, Office
of Chief Counsel, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, at (202) 366-4400.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents of Supplementary Information
I. Executive Summary
II. Background
III. Discussion of the Comments on the NPRM
IV. Summary of MAP-21 and Final Rule
V. Summary Review of Amendments
VI. Regulatory Analyses and Notices
A. Statutory/Legal Authority for This Rulemaking
B. Executive Orders 12866, 13563, 13610, 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. Paperwork Reduction Act
G. Regulatory Identifier Number (RIN)
H. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
I. Environmental Assessment
J. Privacy Act
[[Page 60756]]
I. Executive Summary
On July 6, 2012, the President signed the Moving Ahead for Progress
in the 21st Century Act, or the MAP-21, which included the Hazardous
Materials Transportation Safety Improvement Act of 2012 (HMTSIA) as
Title III of Division C of the statute. Public Law 112-141, 126 Stat.
405, July 6, 2012. Section 33009 of HMTSIA revised 49 U.S.C. 5121 to
include a notification requirement. Congress also directed the
Department to address certain hazardous material (hazmat)
transportation matters through rulemaking:
The safe and expeditious resumption of transportation of
perishable hazardous material, including radiopharmaceuticals and other
medical products that may require timely delivery due to life-
threatening situations;
The means by which non-compliant packages that present an
imminent hazard are placed out-of-service until the condition is
corrected;
The means by which non-compliant packages that do not
present a hazard are moved to their final destination;
Appropriate training and equipment for inspectors; and
The proper closure of packaging in accordance with the
hazardous material regulations.
We are clarifying in this rulemaking, as described further below,
the Department's position with respect to perishable hazardous
material, by amending the opening of packages provision of the
Department's hazardous materials procedural regulations for the opening
of packages, for emergency orders, and for emergency recalls. 49 CFR
109.5. The amendment recognizes the special characteristics and
handling requirements of perishable hazardous material by clarifying
that an agent will stop or open a package containing a perishable
hazardous material only after the agent has utilized appropriate
alternatives. We are also codifying the statutory notification
requirement in HMTSIA by incorporating into the regulations the
Department's current notification procedures from the operations
manual. Finally, we are adding a new provision to address appropriate
equipment for inspectors.
For the remaining mandates to address certain matters related to
the Department's enhanced inspection, investigation, and enforcement
authority, no additional regulatory changes will be made. We believe
that the Department's current rules that were previously established
through notice and comment rulemaking and existing policies and
operating procedures thoroughly address the hazmat transportation
matters identified by Congress as requiring additional regulations. For
instance, in a prior rulemaking, the Department established procedural
regulations for opening packages, removing packages from
transportation, and closing packages in part 109 of title 49, Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR). These regulations include the definition of
key terms, including ``perishable hazardous material.'' The regulations
address how the Department's agents will handle non-compliant packages
that present an imminent hazard and those that do not. Moreover, the
rules address when and how the Department's agents will open a package.
And, if an agent opens a package, there are procedural rules for
closing the package and ensuring its safe resumption of transportation,
if applicable. Specifically, under 49 CFR 109.13, if an imminent hazard
is found to exist after an agent opens a package, the operating
administration's authorized official may issue an out-of-service order
prohibiting the movement of the package. The package must be removed
from transportation until it is brought into compliance. An out-of-
service order is a type of emergency order. The procedural regulations
also include procedures for administrative review, reconsideration, and
appellate review of an out-of-service order. In addition, the
Department developed an internal operations manual for training and use
by its hazmat inspectors and investigators across all modes of
transportation. The operations manual's guidance is intended to target
and manage the use of the enhanced inspection and enforcement authority
in a uniform and consistent manner within the Department. At this time,
we do not have any data or other information that indicate the rules,
policies, and operating procedures currently in place are inadequate or
that additional regulations are necessary.
II. Background
On March 2, 2011, we issued a final rule under Docket No. PHMSA-
2005-22356 (PHM-7), ``Hazardous Materials: Enhanced Enforcement
Procedures.'' 76 FR 11570. The final rule became effective on May 2,
2011. The rule implemented enhanced inspection, investigation, and
enforcement authority conferred on the Secretary of Transportation
(Secretary) by the Hazardous Materials Transportation Safety and
Security Reauthorization Act of 2005 (HMTSSRA). The final rule
established procedures for issuance of emergency orders (restrictions,
prohibitions, recalls, and out-of-service orders) to address unsafe
conditions or practices posing an imminent hazard; opening of packages
to identify undeclared or non-compliant shipments, when the person in
possession of the package refuses a request to open it; and the
temporary detention and inspection of potentially non-compliant
packages. 76 FR 11570 (codified at 49 CFR part 109). In conjunction
with the final rule, the Department of Transportation (Department or
DOT) developed an internal operations manual for training and use by
its inspectors and investigators (collectively agents). The operations
manual is a joint document created by the operating administrations
that enforce the Hazardous Materials Regulations, 49 CFR parts 171-180
(HMR),\1\ to provide guidance to agents who, in the course of
conducting inspections, determine that they need to open a package,
remove a package from transportation, or perform any other function
authorized in part 109. The manual seeks to establish baseline
conditions that will ensure consistent application of the authorities
exercised under 49 CFR part 109 at a minimum threshold. The guidance is
intended to target and manage the use of enhanced inspection and
enforcement authority in a manner that minimizes burdens on the
transportation system while, at the same time, meets the overriding
mission of transportation safety. The operations manual was made
available to the public on the PHMSA Web site, https://www.phmsa.dot.gov.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Under authority delegated by the Secretary, the
Administrators of four agencies within DOT enforce the Hazardous
Materials Regulations, 49 CFR parts 171-180 and other regulations,
approvals, special permits, and orders issued under Federal
hazardous materials transportation law, 49 U.S.C. 5101 et seq.: (1)
Federal Aviation Administration, 49 CFR 1.83(d)(1); (2) Federal
Railroad Administration, 49 CFR 1.89(j); (3) Federal Motor Carrier
Safety Administration, 49 CFR 1.87(d)(1); and (4) Pipeline and
Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, 49 CFR 1.97(b). The
Secretary has delegated authority to the Administrator of each
respective operating administration to exercise the enhanced
inspection and enforcement authority conferred by HMTSSRA. 71 FR
52751, 52753 (Sept. 7, 2006). The United States Coast Guard is
authorized to enforce the Hazardous Materials Regulations in
connection with certain transportation or shipment of hazardous
materials by water but does not have Congressional/delegated
authority to carry out the enhanced inspection, investigation, and
enforcement authority.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On July 6, 2012, the President signed the MAP-21, which included
the HMTSIA as Title III of Division C of the statute. Section 33008 of
HMTSIA created a mandate for the Department to develop uniform
performance standards for hazmat inspectors and investigators. The
standards shall be established as
[[Page 60757]]
mandatory training guidelines in the following areas:
The collection, analysis, and publication of findings from
hazmat accidents or incidents; and
The identification of noncompliance with the HMR, and the
initiation of appropriate enforcement action.
See 126 Stat. at 836
Section 33009 of HMTSIA revised 49 U.S.C. 5121, to include a
notification requirement. Congress also directed the Department to
address certain hazmat transportation matters through rulemaking:
The safe and expeditious resumption of transportation of
perishable hazardous material, including radiopharmaceuticals and other
medical products that may require timely delivery due to life-
threatening situations;
The means by which non-compliant packages that present an
imminent hazard are placed out-of-service until the condition is
corrected;
The means by which non-compliant packages that do not
present a hazard are moved to their final destination;
Appropriate training and equipment for inspectors; and
The proper closure of packaging in accordance with the
hazardous material regulations.
See 126 Stat. at 836-7.
As described further below, we believe that the Department's
current rules that were previously established through notice and
comment rulemaking and existing policies and operating procedures
thoroughly address the congressional mandates to address certain hazmat
transportation matters.
III. Discussion of Comments on the NPRM
On May 22, 2013, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) dealing with these statutory mandates. 78 FR 30258. We received
comments from the National Association of Chemical Distributors (NACD)
and the American Trucking Associations (ATA). In this section we
summarize and discuss the NACD and ATA comments. You may access the
docket and the comments and other documents in this rulemaking by
visiting the Federal eRulemaking Portal at https://www.regulations.gov,
under Docket No. PHMSA-2012-0259.
National Association of Chemical Distributors (NACD)
NACD expressed its overall support for the proposed rule's focus on
clarifying the procedures related to the Department's hazardous
materials procedural regulations for the opening of packages, for
emergency orders, and for emergency recalls. NACD believes we should
use this authority sparingly, and as such, it supports our proposal to
establish a policy that Departmental agents will not intentionally open
packages containing perishable hazardous material unless a compelling
safety need exists. Furthermore, NACD recommends that we extend the
rule's proposed procedures to include temperature-sensitive materials.
NACD asserts that its members frequently transport materials that,
although they may not be completely perishable, are temperature-
sensitive. According to NACD, the materials' properties may change and
make the product less effective if delayed and exposed to extreme
temperatures for a period of time. This could result in substantial
negative impacts for its members and their customers.
When we developed the definition for ``perishable hazardous
material,'' we envisioned etiological agents, such as biological
products, infectious substances, medical waste, and toxins as
perishable commodities that will require special handling. In response
to comments received during the PHM-7 rulemaking, we modified the
definition to include ``hazardous materials consigned for medical
use.'' We adopted the modified definition because we believed it was
broad enough to capture the types of hazardous material requiring
expedited handling as prescribed by the statute. In MAP-21, Congress
reinforced that we had correctly defined the term when it identified
``radiopharmaceuticals and other medical products'' as the types of
perishable hazardous materials requiring special handling.
We note that the current definition of ``perishable hazardous
material'' includes a ``hazardous material that is subject to
significant risk of speedy decay, deterioration, or spoilage.'' NACD,
in its comments, provided only general information regarding
temperature-sensitive materials, indicating they may not be completely
perishable. Moreover, it did not identify specific materials of concern
nor did it provide any information on the rate of decay, deterioration,
or spoilage of any temperature-sensitive materials. Based on this
limited information, it appears the materials contemplated in NACD's
comments are beyond the scope of this rulemaking.
Nevertheless, we are mindful of the concerns of NACD, and other
industry stakeholders, about unnecessary delays that may occur when an
agent exercises one of the enhanced inspection, investigation, and
enforcement authorities. It is important to note that properly prepared
packages will not be opened by DOT agents because in the final rule we
have limited the scope of the authority to open packages, to guard
against unwarranted opening and delay and the unnecessary disruption of
commerce. Moreover, we believe the definition of ``perishable hazardous
material'' and the rules, current procedures, and guidance already
developed are adequate safeguards. However, for additional clarity, we
are amending the opening of packages provision of the Department's
hazardous materials procedural regulations for the opening of packages,
for emergency orders, and for emergency recalls as proposed. The
amendment recognizes the special characteristics and handling
requirements of perishable hazardous material by clarifying that an
agent will stop or open a package containing a perishable hazardous
material only after the agent has utilized appropriate alternatives.
American Trucking Associations (ATA)
ATA expressed its overall support of our mission to safeguard the
transportation of hazardous materials and indicated that it has a
favorable view our proposals for the handling of perishable hazardous
materials and notice of enforcement measures. However, ATA also made it
clear that it did not support our prior rulemaking, PHM-7, in which we
implemented the enhanced inspection and investigation, and enforcement
authority. Moreover, ATA believes the current rulemaking suffers from
many of the same perceived deficiencies that it identified in the
comments it filed in the PHM-7 rulemaking. As such, ATA encourages us
to reconsider its previous comments in the context of this rulemaking.
Further, ATA expresses a number of concerns and recommendations. As a
preliminary matter, it is important to note that we previously
addressed the significant concerns reiterated here by ATA in the final
rule in PHM-7. In that rulemaking, we provided our analysis of the
comments received on the topics presented by the commenters. We
therefore recommend that ATA, other interested parties, and the public,
reexamine the PHM-7 final rule and our comprehensive discussion of the
comments and our responses.
ATA presented numerous areas for our consideration in its most
recent comments. However, as discussed earlier, we have, in a previous
rulemaking, already addressed the
[[Page 60758]]
significant concerns raised again by ATA in its comments to this
rulemaking. Nevertheless, we feel it is important to summarize the
agency's positions on the significant concerns raised, which include
the scope of the rule, liability for delays and injuries, and the
opening of packages.
The Scope of the Rule. ATA contends that the enhanced inspection,
investigation, and enforcement authority applies only to undeclared
hazmat shipments. However, as we explained in our response to this
concern in the PHM-7 final rule, the Department interprets the statute
broadly because the plain language of the statute does not limit the
Department's authority to undeclared shipments. Moreover, the
legislative history indicates that Congress intended to promote the
Department's authority to ensure that hazardous materials shipments are
made in accordance with the HMR. Still, in consideration of commenters'
concerns regarding the package opening authority, we narrowed the scope
of this authority by limiting its use to only packages that may contain
hazardous material and are not in compliance with the HMR or Federal
hazmat law. We said that limiting this authority to packages that may
be non-compliant will guard against unwarranted opening or delay of
declared packages that are in compliance with the HMR. At this time, we
are unaware of any instances of unwarranted package opening or delays.
Liability for Delays and Injuries. ATA believes that the agency
should be responsible for curing any losses incurred by the carrier
related to late deliveries of inspected packages or other non-related
packages that are part of the same load. Further, ATA advocates motor
carrier liability protection from damages that could result from
injuries sustained in opening packages. As we noted it the PHM-7 final
rule, liability for delays is a contractual matter between the motor
carrier and the shipper. As a Federal agency charged with a safety
mission, PHMSA does not endeavor to regulate private contractual
matters between carriers and shippers. Moreover, we do not expect the
Department to bear financial responsibility for private costs related
to our exercise of these authorities. Under the discretionary function
exception, the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) would bar any common law
tort action against the Department or operating administration based on
such activities. See 28 U.S.C. 2680(a). For a more information on this
issue and the FTCA, see our detailed discussion in the PHM-7 NPRM. 73
FR 57287.
The Opening of Packages. ATA believes that opening packages during
transport is too risky. Although ATA's primary concern is presented in
the context of the packaging opening authority, its comments implicate
all of the part 109 authorities, including the removal from
transportation, the transportation for examination and analysis, the
assistance of properly qualified personnel, the closing of packages,
and the safe resumption of transportation. Fundamentally, ATA believes
that opening hazardous materials packages should only occur in a
controlled environment, preferably at the consignor's or consignee's
facility, and performed only by trained and certified Federal agents
wearing the appropriate personal protective equipment, and without any
involvement of the motor carrier's driver. ATA also suggests an
alternative inspection process with components addressing these issues.
For the following reasons, we respectfully disagree with ATA's view of
the package opening authority.
First, we agree with ATA's premise that transporting hazardous
materials is inherently risky. And, as we stated in the PHM-7 final
rule, we agreed that moving the inspection to the consignor/consignee's
facility, if practicable, may be beneficial if it can be accomplished
safely. Also, it is worth reiterating that, in practice, the location
of inspections has not changed since we implemented this authority. All
enforcement activities have continued to proceed as they have in the
past. The package opening authority is merely an extra compliance
inspection tool for DOT agents, but the premise for conducting
inspections, the locations at which they are conducted, and the
regulations under which the industry must comply remained unchanged.
Additionally, we note that the proposed changes in the current
rulemaking align with ATA's other concerns and recommendations, which
include appropriate equipment for inspectors and notice of enforcement
measures to affected parties.
Next, we again point to our discussion of the comments we received
in the PHM-7 rulemaking. For example, in the PHM-7 final rule, we
provided detailed explanations of each of the part 109 authorities and
the issues raised by the commenters, and our responses. During that
rulemaking, many commenters expressed many of the same concerns
regarding the package opening authority that ATA has expressed here.
Accordingly, we took measures to implement the enhanced inspection and
investigation, and enforcement authority with appropriate safeguards
that control risk and minimize burdens on the transportation system,
while at the same time, meeting the Department's overriding mission of
transportation safety.
Last, the safety standards mandated by the Department and the HMR
are risk controls that provide a high degree of protection. We believe
the enhanced inspection, investigation, and enforcement authority and
the procedures being codified by this final rule are necessary risk
controls. At this time, we do not have any data or other information
that indicate the rules, policies, and operating procedures currently
in place are inadequate or that addition regulations, other than those
proposed here, are necessary.
In light of the above, we intend to proceed with the amendments and
additions to the Department's hazardous materials procedural
regulations for the opening of packages, for emergency orders, and for
emergency recalls, as proposed in the NPRM.
IV. Summary of MAP-21 and Final Rule
In MAP-21 Congress directed the Secretary to address certain
transportation matters related to the Department's enhanced inspection,
investigation, and enforcement authority. The relevant MAP-21 mandates
for this rulemaking are:
Notice of enforcement measures;
The safe and expeditious resumption of transportation of
perishable hazardous material, including radiopharmaceuticals and other
medical products that may require timely delivery due to life-
threatening situations;
The means by which non-compliant packages that present an
imminent hazard are placed out-of-service until the condition is
corrected;
The means by which non-compliant packages that do not
present a hazard are moved to their final destination;
Appropriate training and equipment for inspectors; and
The proper closure of packaging in accordance with the
hazardous material regulations.
We are clarifying in this rulemaking, as described further below,
the Department's position with respect to perishable hazardous
material, by amending the opening of packages provision of the
Department's hazardous materials procedural regulations for the opening
of packages, for emergency orders, and for emergency recalls. The
amendment recognizes the special characteristics and handling
requirements of perishable hazardous material by clarifying that an
agent will
[[Page 60759]]
stop or open a package containing a perishable hazardous material only
after the agent has utilized appropriate alternatives. We are also
codifying the statutory notification requirement in HMTSIA by
incorporating into the regulations the Department's current
notification procedures from the operations manual that was developed
in conjunction with the PHM-7 final rule. Finally, we are adding a new
provision to address appropriate equipment for inspectors.
For the remaining mandates to address certain matters related to
the Department's enhanced inspection, investigation, and enforcement
authority, no additional regulatory changes will be made. We believe
that the Department's current rules that were previously established
through notice and comment rulemaking and existing policies and
operating procedures thoroughly address the hazmat transportation
matters identified by Congress. In PHM-7, the Department established
regulations in part 109 to provide procedures for opening packages,
removing packages from transportation, and closing packages. These
regulations include the definition of key terms, including perishable
hazardous material. The regulations address how the Department's agents
will handle non-compliant packages that present an imminent hazard and
those that do not. Moreover, the rules address when and how the
Department's agents will open a package. And, if an agent opens a
package, there are procedural rules for closing the package and
ensuring its safe resumption of transportation, if applicable. In
addition, the Department developed an internal operations manual for
training and use by its hazmat inspectors and investigators across all
modes of transportation. The operations manual's guidance is intended
to target and manage within the Department the use of the enhanced
inspection and enforcement authority in a uniform and consistent
manner. At this time, we do not have any data or other information that
indicate the rules, policies, and operating procedures currently in
place are inadequate or that additional rulemaking is necessary.
Notice of Enforcement Measures
In PHM-7, we established procedures to implement the enhanced
inspection, investigation, and enforcement authority conferred on the
Secretary through HMTSSRA. In the NPRM for that rule, in response to
commenters' concerns about notifying offerors and consignees about a
possible delay in arrival, we agreed that all parties responsible for a
shipment that is opened or removed from transportation need to be
notified of the action taken. We said that ``DOT inspectors will be
required to communicate the findings made and enforcement measures
taken to the appropriate offeror, recipient, and carrier of the package
* * *''. 73 FR 57288. In the final rule, we outlined how we would
notify affected parties when an agent exercises one of the new
authorities. 76 FR 11580. In the preamble to the final rule, we
explained that the notification procedures would be incorporated into
the Department's joint operations manual. Id. The notification
procedures that we developed for the joint operations manual address
situations where an agent may exercise a 49 CFR part 109 authority for
a package that is in transit. In this case, the person in possession of
the package, such as a carrier, may not be the person responsible for
the package, i.e., the offeror. Therefore, we set out separate
procedures for immediately notifying the person in possession and the
original offeror. Generally, the agent will verbally notify the person
in possession. If the person in possession is not the original offeror,
the agent will also take reasonable measures to notify the original
offeror.
In MAP-21 Congress added a notification requirement to the
Department's inspection and investigation authority. Under this
mandate, an agent shall provide to the affected person reasonable
notice of the agent's exercise of authority, any findings made, and any
actions being taken for noncompliance. See 126 Stat. at 836-7.
We are codifying in this final rule the statutory notification
requirement by incorporating into the regulations the Department's
current notification procedures from the joint operations manual. As
discussed above, the joint operations manual includes procedures and
guidance to agents for providing notice of enforcement measures taken
under 49 CFR part 109. The procedures in the manual are comprehensive
and comport with the statutory mandate. As such, a new notification
section will be added to part 109, subpart B of 49 CFR. It will require
that an agent, after exercising a 49 CFR part 109 inspection or
investigation authority, immediately take reasonable measures to notify
the appropriate person of the reason for the action being taken, the
results of any preliminary investigation including apparent violations
of the HMR, and any further action that may be warranted.
The Safe and Expeditious Resumption of Transportation of Perishable
Hazardous Material
We addressed the opening, reclosing, and resumption of
transportation of perishable hazardous material in a previous
rulemaking. In PHM-7, we defined ``perishable hazardous material'' as
``a hazardous material that is subject to significant risk of speedy
decay, deterioration, or spoilage, or hazardous materials consigned for
medical use, in the prevention, treatment, or cure of a disease or
condition in human beings or animals where expeditious shipment and
delivery meets a critical medical need.'' 76 FR 11592 (codified at 49
CFR 109.1). Further, we established procedures for reclosing a package
containing a perishable hazardous material and its safe and expeditious
resumption of transportation. Section 109.13 contains the requirements
for the closing of packages and the safe resumption of transportation,
including a specific requirement pertaining to perishable hazardous
material.
We believe the definition of ``perishable hazardous material'' and
the rules, current procedures, and guidance already developed for
reclosing packages, sufficiently address Congress' concern and the need
for expeditious treatment of these types of materials. We also note
that in the Department's joint operations manual, we have significantly
restricted an agent's ability to handle or open a package containing
perishable hazardous material. For example, an agent must have been
trained in the handling of the specific material and may only open a
perishable hazardous material package in a designated facility, if
required, and have all safety equipment, handling equipment, and
materials to properly close the package. Notwithstanding these
restrictions, in order to clarify the Department's position with
respect to perishable hazardous materials, we are amending the opening
of packages provision of the Department's hazardous materials
procedural regulations for the opening of packages, for emergency
orders, and for emergency recalls. The amendment recognizes the special
characteristics and handling requirements of perishable hazardous
material by clarifying that an agent will stop or open a package
containing a perishable hazardous material only after the agent has
utilized appropriate alternatives.
Handling of Non-Compliant Packages
In MAP-21 Congress mandated that the Department take all actions
[[Page 60760]]
necessary to finalize a regulation addressing the means by which non-
compliant packages are processed when an agent exercises an authority
under part 109. Per 126 Stat. 837, the matters to be addressed include
how packages that present an imminent hazard are placed out-of-service,
until corrected, and the means by which noncompliant packages that do
not present a hazard are moved to their final destination.
The Department's procedural rules for opening of packages, for
emergency orders, and for emergency recalls are in 49 CFR part 109.
These procedures address the means by which a non-compliant package
that is found to be an imminent hazard is placed out-of-service.
Specifically, in 49 CFR 109.13, if an imminent hazard is found to exist
after an agent opens a package, the operating administration's
authorized official may issue an out-of-service order prohibiting the
movement of the package. 49 CFR 109.13(b). The package must be removed
from transportation until it is brought into compliance. Id. An out-of-
service order is a type of emergency order. 49 CFR 109.1. Subpart C of
part 109 contains the procedural regulations for issuing an out-of-
service order and procedures for administrative review,
reconsideration, and appellate review of an emergency order. For
example, a recipient of an out-of-service order may appeal the order to
PHMSA's Chief Safety Officer, under 49 CFR 109.17(b)(4), pursuant to
procedures in 49 CFR 109.19. Furthermore, the joint operations manual
provides inspection personnel with step-by-step procedures and
additional guidance for issuing an out-of-service order. For example,
at least two levels of review and consultation with the operating
administration's legal office is required before an emergency order may
be issued. Moreover, the operations manual addresses documentation
requirements, notification, service, publication, and termination
requirements.
It is important to note that a non-compliant package that does not
present a hazard may not continue in transportation until all
identified non-compliant issues are resolved. 49 CFR 109.13(d). In the
PHM-7 final rule where we established the enhanced enforcement
procedures, we stated that for a non-compliant package, the agent would
not close the package and that there is no obligation to bring that
package into compliance. 76 FR 11587. Further, we stated, ``[t]he
Department's operating administrations will not be responsible for
bringing an otherwise non-compliant package into compliance and
resuming its movement in commerce.'' Id. We reasoned that if the
package does not conform to the HMR at the time of inspection, the fact
that a DOT official opened it in the course of an inspection or
investigation will not make DOT or its agent responsible for bringing
the package into compliance. Id.
In light of the above, we have already fulfilled the applicable
mandate for the handling of non-compliant packages and no further
action is required.
Appropriate Training and Equipment for Inspectors
Congress recognized that ``[t]here is currently no uniform training
standard for hazardous materials (`hazmat') inspectors and
investigators.'' H. Conf. Rep. No. 112-557 at 610 (2012). To address
this problem, it mandated in MAP-21 that the Secretary establish
uniform performance standards for training hazmat inspectors and
investigators no later than eighteen months from the date of enactment
of the Act. 126 Stat. at 836. The mandate authorizes the development of
guidelines for hazmat inspector and investigator qualifications; best
practices and standards for hazmat inspector and investigator training
programs; and standard protocols to coordinate investigation efforts
among Federal, State, and local jurisdictions on accidents or incidents
involving the transportation of hazardous material. In order to achieve
a uniform hazmat training standard, Congress required that the
standards, protocols, and guidelines developed would be mandatory to
the Department's multimodal personnel conducting hazmat enforcement
inspections and investigations.
Additionally, Congress mandated that the Department take all
actions necessary to finalize a regulation, no later than one year from
the date of enactment of the Act, addressing appropriate training and
equipment for inspectors when exercising an authority under 49 CFR part
109. See 126 Stat. at 837.
Although the MAP-21 mandates here are training related, it is
evident that the development of a uniform training scheme is essential
because it will establish the foundation upon which future training for
hazmat inspectors and investigators is based. As such, it is premature
to require the Department to promulgate enforcement procedural
regulations for hazmat training and equipment before the Department has
had the opportunity to develop uniform performance training standards.
This approach does not appear to be the best way to meet Congress'
objective to ensure that all hazmat inspectors and investigations
receive uniform and standardized training. It would be more appropriate
for the Department to establish the uniform performance training
standards, best practices, and protocols before it develops additional
training regulations for its hazmat personnel. This would ensure that
new training rules are consistent with the uniform training scheme.
Notwithstanding the discussion above, we understand that proper
training of inspectors and investigators is essential to ensure that
the enhanced enforcement authority is used effectively and judiciously.
In the NPRM for PHM-7, we explained that the operating administrations
responsible for enforcement of the HMR--PHMSA, FMCSA, FAA, and FRA--
worked together to develop the rule and a joint operations manual. 73
FR 57285. We further explained that the proposed regulations set out a
framework for the procedures the operating administrations will employ
when conducting inspections or investigations, thus ensuring
consistency in approaches and enforcement measures among modes of
transportation. Moreover, we stated that the final rule, implemented
with the guidance of an operational manual, would ensure that this
authority was properly used. Id. We expressed our confidence in this
approach because with the cooperation of the operating administrations
in the development of the rule, and the accompanying operations manual,
it meant that all Department inspectors and investigators would have
the same general training and modal specific instruction. 73 FR 57288.
Regarding equipment, we are adding a new provision to address
appropriate equipment for inspectors when they exercise a part 109
authority. A new equipment section will be added to new Subpart D--
Equipment, requiring an agent to use the appropriate safety, handling,
and other equipment authorized by his or her operating administration's
equipment requirements for hazardous material inspectors and
investigators.
Consequently, we do not believe that we should develop rules for
appropriate training in this rulemaking. Instead, we advocate
addressing any performance standards as part of the larger hazardous
materials performance standard development activity currently underway.
In the meantime, we believe the existing rules in 49 CFR part 109 and
the attendant operational procedures in the joint operations manual, as
well as each operating
[[Page 60761]]
administration's specific guidance for its enforcement staff,
sufficiently address the training concern identified by Congress in the
MAP-21 directive. Therefore, PHMSA does not believe that further action
is necessary at this time.
The Proper Closure of Packaging in Accordance With HMR
In MAP-21 Congress mandated that the Department take all actions
necessary to finalize a regulation addressing ``the proper closure of
packaging in accordance with the hazardous material regulations.'' 126
Stat. at 837.
In PHM-7 we addressed reclosing of packages opened under the
enhanced inspection, investigation, and enforcement authority. In
several of the comments in response to that rulemaking, the regulated
community raised concerns about how we were going to reclose packages
after they have been opened under the new authority. We responded by
stating that the Department was developing internal operational
procedures and guidance to address the proper closure of packaging in
accordance with the HMR. We also solicited further comment from the
public on the factors that should be considered in the development of
these procedures and guidance. 73 FR 57286. However, we also stated
that an agent's obligation to reclose a package only arose if, after
opening the package, an imminent hazard was found not to exist and the
package otherwise complied with the HMR. 76 FR 11587. More importantly,
we also said that the Department's operating administrations would not
be responsible for bringing an otherwise non-specification or non-
compliant package into compliance and resuming its movement in
commerce. Id. If the package did not comply with the HMR, the fact that
a DOT official opened it in the course of an inspection or
investigation would not make DOT or its inspector responsible for
bringing the package into compliance. Id. In the final rule, we
significantly revised the new rule for closing packages to cover each
possible re-closure scenario: no imminent hazard found; imminent hazard
found; package does not contain a hazardous material; and package
contains a hazardous material not in compliance with the HMR. Id.
Further, we stated that the inspector would only be required to reclose
a package in accordance with the packaging manufacturer's closure
instructions or other appropriate method when a package was opened and
no imminent hazard was found. Id. In the joint operations manual we
developed procedures for properly closing a package. These procedures
include steps for reclosing a package. It also includes additional
requirements and procedures to complete the re-closure process,
including methods to thoroughly document the activities performed.
In light of the above, we believe the existing requirements in 49
CFR part 109 for closing opened packages (Sec. 109.13) and the
attendant operational procedures in the joint operations manual
sufficiently address the matter identified by Congress in the MAP-21
directive. Therefore, no further action is necessary.
V. Summary Review of Amendments
In this final rule we are amending the opening of packages
provision of the Department's hazardous materials procedural
regulations for the opening of packages, for emergency orders, and for
emergency recalls. The amendment recognizes the special characteristics
and handling requirements of perishable hazardous material by
clarifying that an agent will stop or open a package containing a
perishable hazardous material only after the agent has utilized
appropriate alternatives. We are also adding a notification provision
to part 109, Subpart B--Inspections and Investigations. The provision
will provide for the immediate and reasonable notification of
enforcement action taken by an inspector or investigator whenever he or
she exercises one of the inspection and investigation authorities under
part 109, subpart B, which includes the opening of packages; removing a
package and related packages in a shipment from transportation;
directing a package to be transported to a facility for examination and
analysis; and authorizing properly qualified personnel to assist in
activities conducted under subpart B. The notice will include the
reason for the action being taken, the results of any preliminary
investigation including apparent violations of the HMR, and any further
action that may be warranted. Finally, we are adding a new provision to
address appropriate equipment for inspectors when they exercise a part
109 authority. The new equipment section will be added to part 109
under new Subpart D--Equipment. The provision will require an agent to
use the appropriate safety, handling, and other equipment authorized by
his or her operating administration's equipment requirements for
hazardous material inspectors and investigators.
VI. Regulatory Analyses and Notices
A. Statutory/Legal Authority for This Rulemaking
This final rule is published under the authority of the Federal
hazardous materials transportation law, 49 U.S.C. 5101 et seq. Section
5103(b) authorizes the Secretary to prescribe regulations for the safe
transportation, including security, of hazardous material in
intrastate, interstate, and foreign commerce. This final rule would
revise the Department's procedural regulations for opening of packages,
for emergency orders, and for emergency recalls to address certain
matters identified in the Hazardous Materials Transportation Safety Act
of 2012 related to Department's enhanced inspection, investigation, and
enforcement authority. The final rule carries out the statutory mandate
and clarifies DOT's role and responsibilities in ensuring that
hazardous materials are being safely transported and promoting the
regulated community's understanding and compliance with regulatory
requirements applicable to specific situations and operations.
B. Executive Orders 12866, 13563, 13610, and DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures
This 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). The final rule
is not considered a significant rule under the Regulatory Policies and
Procedures order issued by the U.S. Department of Transportation (44 FR
11034, February 26, 1979).
Executive Order 13563 is supplemental to and reaffirms the
principles, structures, and definitions governing regulatory review
that were established in Executive Order 12866 Regulatory Planning and
Review of September 30, 1993. Executive Order 13563, issued January 18,
2011, notes that our nation's current regulatory system must not only
protect public health, welfare, safety, and our environment but also
promote economic growth, innovation, competitiveness, and job creation
(76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011). Further, this executive order urges
government agencies to consider regulatory approaches that reduce
burdens and maintain flexibility and freedom of choice for the public.
In addition, Federal agencies are asked to periodically review existing
significant regulations, retrospectively analyze rules that may be
outmoded, ineffective, insufficient, or excessively burdensome, and
modify, streamline, expand, or
[[Page 60762]]
repeal regulatory requirements in accordance with what has been
learned.
Executive Order 13610, issued May 10, 2012, urges agencies to
conduct retrospective analyses of existing rules to examine whether
they remain justified and whether they should be modified or
streamlined in light of changed circumstances, including the rise of
new technologies (77 FR 28469, May 14, 2012).
By building off of each other, these three Executive Orders require
agencies to regulate in the ``most cost-effective manner,'' to make a
``reasoned determination that the benefits of the intended regulation
justify its costs,'' and to develop regulations that ``impose the least
burden on society.''
This final rule augments 49 CFR part 109, which contains
regulations on DOT inspection and investigation procedures. These
regulations are not part of the HMR, which governs the transportation
of hazardous materials, thus they do not carry any additional
compliance requirements or costs for entities that must comply with the
HMR. The benefits of the rule are that the procedures being
incorporated are transparent to the regulated community, and ensure
that the shipper is notified of an enforcement action. This will
eliminate any suspicion of malice on the part of the agency or any
specific inspector, and provide information to the shipper that could
be used to modify any remaining defective operations that led to the
removal. Also, the operations manual ensures that DOT's procedures are
consistent across all modes.
C. Executive Order 13132
This final rule has been analyzed in accordance with the principles
and criteria contained in Executive Order 13132 (``Federalism''). 49
U.S.C. 5125(h) provides that the preemption provisions in Federal
hazardous material transportation law do ``not apply to any procedure *
* * utilized by a State, political subdivision of a State, or Indian
tribe to enforce a requirement applicable to the transportation of
hazardous material.'' Accordingly, this final rule has no preemptive
effect on State, local, or Indian tribe enforcement procedures and
penalties.
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. Regulatory Flexibility Act, Executive Order 13272, and DOT
Procedures and Policies
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 that a rule is not expected to have
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. I hereby
certify that the final rule will not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities. This final rule applies to
offerors and carriers of hazardous materials, some of which are small
entities; however, there will not be any economic impact on any person
who complies with Federal hazardous materials law and the regulations
and orders issued under that law.
Potentially affected small entities. The provisions in this final
rule will apply to persons who perform, or cause to be performed,
functions related to the transportation of hazardous materials in
transportation in commerce. This includes offerors of hazardous
materials and persons in physical control of a hazardous material
during transportation in commerce. Such persons may primarily include
motor carriers, air carriers, vessel operators, rail carriers,
temporary storage facilities, and intermodal transfer facilities.
Unless alternative definitions have been established by the agency in
consultation with the Small Business Administration, the definition of
``small business'' has the same meaning as under the Small Business Act
(15 CFR parts 631-657c). Therefore, since no such special definition
has been established, PHMSA employs the thresholds (published in 13 CFR
121.201) of 1,500 employees for air carriers (North American Industry
Classification System [NAICS] Subgroup 481), 500 employees for rail
carriers (NAICS Subgroup 482), 500 employees for vessel operators
(NAICS Subgroup 483), $18.5 million in revenues for motor carriers
(NAICS Subgroup 484), and $18.5 million in revenues for warehousing and
storage companies (NAICS Subgroup 493). Of the approximately 116,000
entities to which this final rule applies (104,000 of which are motor
carriers), we estimate that about 90 percent are small entities.
Potential cost impacts. This final rule revises 49 CFR part 109,
which contains regulations on DOT inspection and investigation
procedures. These regulations are not part of the HMR, which govern the
transportation of hazmat, thus they do not carry any additional
compliance requirements or costs for entities that must comply with the
HMR.
Alternate proposals for small business. Because this final rule
addresses a Congressional mandate, we have limited latitude in defining
alternative courses of action. The option of taking no action would be
both inconsistent with Congress' direction and undesirable from the
standpoint of safety and enforcement. Failure to implement these
amendments will perpetuate the problem of undeclared hazardous material
shipments and resulting incidents or releases. It will also leave PHMSA
and other operating administrations without an effective plan to abate
an imminent safety hazard.
F. Paperwork Reduction Act
PHMSA has analyzed this final rule in accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA). The PRA requires Federal agencies to
minimize the paperwork burden imposed on the American public by
ensuring maximum utility and quality of federal information, ensuring
the use of information technology to improve government performance,
and improving the Federal government's accountability for managing
information collection activities. This final rule contains no new
information collection requirements subject to the PRA.
G. Regulatory Identifier Number (RIN)
A regulatory 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. 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
$141.3 million 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.
I. Environmental Assessment
The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended
(42 U.S.C. 4321-4347), and implementing regulations by the Council on
Environmental Quality (40 CFR part
[[Page 60763]]
1500) require Federal agencies to consider the consequences of Federal
actions and prepare a detailed statement on actions that significantly
affect the quality of the human environment.
The purpose of this rulemaking is to amend the Department's
existing enforcement procedures to (1) to clarify the Department's
position with respect to perishable hazardous material, by amending the
opening of packages provision; (2) provide notice of enforcement
measures to affected parties; and (3) address appropriate equipment for
inspectors. Because this final rule addresses Congressional mandates,
we have limited latitude in defining alternative courses of action. The
option of taking no action would be both inconsistent with Congress'
direction and undesirable from the standpoint of safety and
enforcement.
PHMSA sought comment on the environmental assessment in the NPRM.
PHMSA did not receive any comments regarding the environmental
assessment contained in that rulemaking. This action has been
thoroughly reviewed by PHMSA. Given that the inspection and enforcement
procedures in this final rule will not change the current inspection
procedures for DOT, but will provide transparency into our existing
operations and procedures, PHMSA concludes that the rule will not
result in significant environmental impacts.
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) which may be
viewed at: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2000-04-11/pdf/00-8505.pdf.
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 109
Equipment, Inspections and investigations.
The Final Rule
In consideration of the foregoing, part 109 of chapter I, subtitle
B of title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 109--DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
PROCEDURAL REGULATIONS FOR OPENING OF PACKAGES, FOR EMERGENCY
ORDERS, AND FOR EMERGENCY RECALLS
0
1. The authority citation for part 109 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101-5128, 44701; Pub. L. 101-410 Sec. 4
(28 U.S.C. 2461 note); Pub. L. 104-121 Secs. 212-213; Pub. L. 104-
134 Sec. 31001; 49 CFR 1.81, 1.97.
0
2. In Sec. 109.5, paragraph (a) introductory text is revised, and
paragraph (b) is added to read as follows:
Sec. 109.5 Opening of packages.
(a) In general. Except as provided in paragraph (b):
* * * * *
(b) Perishable hazardous material. To ensure the expeditious
transportation of a package containing a perishable hazardous material,
an agent will utilize appropriate alternatives before exercising an
authority under paragraph (a) of this section.
0
3. Add Sec. 109.16 to subpart B as follows:
Sec. 109.16 Notification of enforcement measures.
In addition to complying with the notification requirements in
Sec. 109.7 of this part, an agent, after exercising an authority under
this Subpart, will immediately take reasonable measures to notify the
offeror and the person in possession of the package, providing the
reason for the action being taken, the results of any preliminary
investigation including apparent violations of subchapter C of this
chapter, and any further action that may be warranted.
0
4. Add subpart D, consisting of Sec. 109.25, to read as follows:
Subpart D--Equipment
Sec. 109.25 Equipment.
When an agent exercises an authority under subpart B of this part,
the agent shall use the appropriate safety, handling, and other
equipment authorized by his or her operating administration's equipment
requirements for hazardous material inspectors and investigators.
Issued in Washington, DC, on September 26, 2013 under authority
delegated in 49 CFR 1.97.
Timothy P. Butters,
Deputy Administrator, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration.
[FR Doc. 2013-23894 Filed 10-1-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-60-P