Hazardous Materials: Compatibility With the Regulations of the International Atomic Energy Agency (RRR), 40589-40618 [2014-15514]
Download as PDF
Vol. 79
Friday,
No. 133
July 11, 2014
Part V
Department of Transportation
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
49 CFR Parts 171, 172, 173, et al.
Hazardous Materials: Compatibility With the Regulations of the International
Atomic Energy Agency (RRR); Final Rule
VerDate Mar<15>2010
22:43 Jul 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4717
Sfmt 4717
E:\FR\FM\11JYR3.SGM
11JYR3
40590
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 133 / Friday, July 11, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials
Safety Administration
49 CFR Parts 171, 172, 173, 174, 175,
176, 177 and 178
[Docket No. PHMSA–2009–0063 (HM–250)]
RIN 2137–AE38
Hazardous Materials: Compatibility
With the Regulations of the
International Atomic Energy Agency
(RRR)
Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration
(PHMSA), Department of Transportation
(DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
PHMSA, in coordination with
the Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC), is amending requirements in the
Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR)
governing the transportation of Class 7
(radioactive) materials based on recent
changes contained in the International
Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
publication ‘‘Regulations for the Safe
Transport of Radioactive Material, 2009
Edition, IAEA Safety Standards Series
No. TS–R–1.’’ The purposes of this
rulemaking are to harmonize
requirements of the HMR with
international standards for the
transportation of Class 7 (radioactive)
materials and update, clarify, correct, or
provide relief from certain regulatory
requirements applicable to the
transportation of Class 7 (radioactive)
materials.
SUMMARY:
Effective date: October 1, 2014.
Voluntary compliance date: PHMSA
is authorizing voluntary compliance
beginning July 11, 2014.
Delayed compliance date: Unless
otherwise specified, compliance with
the amendments adopted in this final
rule is required beginning July 13, 2015.
Incorporation by reference date: The
incorporation by reference of certain
publications listed in this rule is
approved by the Director of the Federal
Register as of October 1, 2014.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Steven Webb, Standards and
Rulemaking Division, telephone (202)
366–8553, or Michael Conroy,
Engineering and Research Division,
telephone (202) 366–4545, Pipeline and
Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., 2nd Floor, Washington, DC,
20590–0001.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
DATES:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
22:43 Jul 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
I. Executive Summary
II. Background
III. Section-by-Section Review
IV. Regulatory Analyses and Notices
A. Statutory/Legal Authority for the
Rulemaking
B. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 and
DOT Regulatory Policies and
C. Procedures
D. Executive Order 13132
E. Executive Order 13175
F. Regulatory Flexibility Act, Executive
Order 13272, and DOT Policies and
Procedures
G. Paperwork Reduction Act
H. Regulatory Identifier Number (RIN)
I. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
J. Environmental Assessment
K. Privacy Act
L. Executive Order 13609 and International
Trade Analysis
I. Executive Summary
In this final rule, PHMSA is amending
the Hazardous Materials Regulations
(HMR; 49 CFR parts 171–180) to
incorporate changes adopted in the 2009
Edition of the IAEA Safety Standards
publication titled ‘‘Regulations for the
Safe Transport of Radioactive Material,
2009 Edition, Safety Requirements, No.
TS–R–1’’ (hereinafter referred to as
‘‘TS–R–1.’’) 1 Additionally, PHMSA is
making other changes to amend or
clarify the requirements for transport of
radioactive materials. These changes
will help ensure that the classification,
packaging requirements, and hazard
communication requirements for
shipments of radioactive materials
provide the requisite level of public
safety and are consistent with those
employed throughout the world.
The harmonization of domestic and
international standards for hazardous
materials transportation enhances safety
by creating a uniform framework for
compliance. Harmonization also
facilitates international trade by
minimizing the costs and other burdens
of complying with multiple or
inconsistent safety requirements and
avoiding hindrances to international
shipments. Harmonization has become
increasingly important as the volume of
hazardous materials transported in
international commerce grows.
Accordingly, federal law and policy
strongly favor the harmonization of
domestic and international standards for
1 A copy of the 2009 Edition of TS–R–1may be
obtained from the U.S. distributors, Bernan, 15200
NBN Way, P.O. Box 191, Blue Ridge Summit, PA
17214, telephone 800–865–3457, email:
customercare@bernan.com, or Renouf Publishing
Company Ltd., 812 Proctor Ave., Ogdensburg, NY
13669, telephone: 1–888–551–7470, email: orders@
renoufbooks.com. An electronic copy of TS–R–1
has been placed in the docket of this rulemaking
and may also be found at the following IAEA Web
site: https://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/publications/
PDF/Pub1384_web.pdf.
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
hazardous materials transportation. The
Federal hazardous materials
transportation law (Federal hazmat law;
49 U.S.C. 5101 et seq.) directs PHMSA
to participate in relevant international
standard-setting bodies and encourages
DOT to align the HMR with
international transport standards to the
extent practicable, while recognizing
that deviations may be appropriate, at
times in the public interest (see 49
U.S.C. 5120). Under this authority,
PHMSA actively participates in relevant
international standard-setting bodies
and promotes the adoption of standards
consistent with the high safety
standards set by the HMR. PHMSA’s
continued leadership in maintaining
consistency with international
regulations and enhances the hazardous
materials safety program.
II. Background
Under their respective statutory
authorities, DOT and the NRC jointly
regulate the transportation of
radioactive materials to, from, and
within the United States. In accordance
with their July 2, 1979, Memorandum of
Understanding (a copy of which has
been placed in the docket of this
rulemaking) (44 FR 38690):
1. DOT regulates both shippers and
carriers with respect to:
A. Packaging requirements;
B. Communication requirements for:
D Shipping paper contents,
D Package labeling and marking
requirements, and
D Vehicle placarding requirements;
C. Training and emergency response
requirements; and
D. Highway routing requirements.2
2. NRC requires its licensees to satisfy
requirements to protect public health
and safety and to assure the common
defense and security, and:
A. Certifies Type B and fissile
material package designs and approves
package quality assurance programs for
its licensees;
B. Provides technical support to
PHMSA and works with PHMSA to
ensure consistency with respect to the
transportation of Class 7 (radioactive)
materials; and
C. Conducts inspections of licensees
and an enforcement program within its
jurisdiction to assure compliance with
its requirements.
Since 1968, PHMSA and the NRC
(and their predecessor agencies) have, to
the extent practicable, harmonized their
2 Within DOT, PHMSA is currently delegated the
authority to carry out the functions assigned to
DOT, except for highway routing requirements
which are set forth in regulations of the Federal
Motor Carrier Safety Administration. 49 CFR part
397, subpart D.
E:\FR\FM\11JYR3.SGM
11JYR3
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 133 / Friday, July 11, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
respective regulations with international
regulations of the IAEA in:
• Safety Series No. 6, Regulations for
the Safe Transport of Radioactive
Material, as published in 1961 and
revised in 1964 and 1967. Amendments
to the HMR were adopted in a final rule
published on October 4, 1968 in Docket
HM–2 (33 FR 14918).
• The major updates of Safety Series
No. 6 in 1973 and 1985. See the final
rules published on March 10, 1983 in
Docket HM–169 (48 FR 10218) and
September 28, 1995, in Docket HM–
169A (60 FR 50291).
• The 1996 major revision to the
Safety Series No. 6, renamed
‘‘Regulations for the Safe Transport of
Radioactive Material, 1996 Edition, No.
ST–1’’ issued by the IAEA in 1996 and
republished in 2000 to include minor
editorial changes at which time the
previous title was changed to
‘‘Regulations for the Safe Transport of
Radioactive Material, 1996 Edition, No.
TS–R–1 (ST–1, Revised).’’ See the final
rule published on January 26, 2004, in
Docket HM–230 (69 FR 3632).
Since then, the IAEA has published
amendments and revised editions of
TS–R–1 in 2003, 2005, and 2009.3
PHMSA published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) on August 12, 2011
(76 FR 50332) that proposed to amend
the HMR to maintain alignment with the
2009 Edition of TS–R–1, which
incorporates all of the changes made to
TS–R–1 in the 2003 amendments, the
2005 Edition, as well as other revisions.
In this final rule, PHMSA is adopting
the proposal with some changes. In
addition to changes to harmonize with
TS–R–1, PHMSA is enacting regulatory
amendments identified through internal
regulatory review processes to update,
clarify, correct, or provide relief from
certain regulatory requirements
applicable to the transportation of Class
7 (radioactive) materials. Notable
amendments to the HMR in this final
rule include the following:
• Revise paragraph § 173.25(a)(4) to
adopt the new TS–R–1 requirement for
the marking of all overpacks of Class 7
(radioactive) packages with the word
‘‘OVERPACK.’’
• Revise §§ 172.203(d)(3) and
172.403(g) to clarify that the total
activity indicated on the shipping paper
and label must be the maximum activity
during transportation.
• Revise Table 1 in § 172.504 to
additionally require conveyances
carrying unpackaged LSA–I material or
SCO–I, all conveyances required by
3 In 2012, the IAEA published the Specific Safety
Requirements-6 (SSR–6) which may be addressed in
a future rulemaking.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
22:43 Jul 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
§§ 173.427, 173.441, and 173.457 to
operate under exclusive use conditions,
and all closed vehicles used in
accordance with § 173.443(d) to be
placarded. This change is a result of
internal PHMSA review.
• Update definitions in § 173.403 for
contamination, criticality safety index
(CSI) for conveyances, fissile material,
LSA, and radiation level. These changes
are proposed primarily to align with
definitions in the TS–R–1, and the
change to the definition of ‘‘criticality
safety index’’ is made to align with the
NRC definition.
• Extend the retention period for
Type A, Type IP–2, and Type IP–3
package documentation from one year to
two years, to coincide with the
minimum retention period currently
required for shipping papers. PHMSA is
also including more detailed language
describing the kinds of information
required to be included as part of the
Type A package documentation. This
change is being made based on internal
PHMSA review of existing regulations,
and is intended to ensure proper testing
and preparation of these packages prior
to being offered for transportation.
• Require that any conveyance,
overpack, freight container, tank, or
intermediate bulk container involved in
an exclusive use shipment under
§ 173.427 or § 173.443(b) be surveyed
with appropriate radiation detection
instrumentation after each such
shipment, and not be permitted to be
used for another such exclusive use
shipment until the removable surface
contamination meets package
contamination limits and the radiation
dose rate at each accessible surface is no
greater than 0.005 mSv/h (0.5 mrem/h).
These changes are a result of internal
PHMSA review.
• Update matter incorporated by
reference to align with updated
references in the TS–R–1 in § 171.7 and
applicable sections.
• Clarify labeling requirements for
radioactive shipments with subsidiary
hazards in § 172.402. This change is a
result of internal PHMSA review.
• Require that, when it is evident that
a package of radioactive material or
conveyance carrying unpackaged
radioactive material is leaking or
suspected to have leaked, access to the
package or conveyance must be
restricted and, as soon as possible, the
extent of contamination and the
resultant radiation level of the package
or conveyance must be assessed in
§ 173.443. This will more closely align
with the requirements in TS–R–1.
As in PHMSA’s past rulemakings to
incorporate updates of the IAEA
regulations into the HMR, PHMSA has
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40591
worked in close cooperation with the
NRC in the development of this
rulemaking. The NRC published a
parallel NPRM on May 16, 2013 (78 FR
28988). PHMSA anticipates that NRC
will publish a parallel final rule at a
future date. Since the proposed rules
will be published separately, there is a
risk of differences in overlapping
proposals that may affect the
compatibility of the NRC and PHMSA
regulations. PHMSA and the NRC have
coordinated the development and
publication schedules for the final rules.
Several actions have been taken to
mitigate possible problems that may
arise from such asynchronous
publication, including but not limited
to: A delayed mandatory compliance
date, enforcement guidance/discretion,
and deferred consideration of a
proposed change to § 173.453 regarding
a fissile material exception for uranium
enriched in uranium-235. PHMSA
believes these actions, most specifically
the delayed mandatory compliance date,
will allow the NRC to complete its
rulemaking cycle and to publish a final
rule with an effective date in line with
our effective date. This final rule
addresses only the areas for which DOT
has jurisdiction as defined in the MOU
with NRC.
In response to the 2011 NPRM we
received comments from the following
persons, companies, associations and
other entities:
• Alaska Inter-Tribal Council
• B&W Y–12 L.L.C. (B&W)
• Energy Solutions
• J. L. Shepherd & Associates (J. L.
Shepherd)
• Lawrence Laude
• Nuclear Information and Resource
Service (NIRS) & Citizens for
Alternatives to Chemical
Contamination (CACC) (NIRS &
CACC)
• QSA Global Inc. (QSA Global)
• Regulatory Resources
• The Pennsylvania State University
(Penn State)
• U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE)
• United States Enrichment Corporation
(USEC)
• Veolia ES Technical Solutions, L.L.C.
(Veolia)
These comments are discussed in the
section-by-section portion of this rule.4
In considering each proposal in the
NPRM and each comment, we reviewed
and evaluated each amendment on its
own merit, on the basis of its overall
impact on transportation safety, and on
the basis of the economic implications
4 Comments which were outside the scope of this
rulemaking are not addressed in this final rule.
E:\FR\FM\11JYR3.SGM
11JYR3
40592
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 133 / Friday, July 11, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
associated with its adoption into the
HMR. Our goal is to harmonize the HMR
with TS–R–1 without diminishing the
level of safety currently provided by the
HMR or imposing undue burdens on the
regulated community.
III. Section-by-Section Review
Part 171
Part 172
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Section 171.7
In § 171.7, which contains a listing of
all standards incorporated by reference
into the HMR, PHMSA is replacing the
1996 edition of ‘‘TS–R–1 (ST–1,
Revised)’’ with the 2009 edition of TS–
R–1, with which we are harmonizing
requirements in the HMR. We are also
replacing the International Organization
for Standardization standard ‘‘ISO
2919–1980(E) Sealed radioactive
sources—classification’’ with ‘‘ISO
2919–1999(E) Radiation Protection—
Sealed radioactive sources—General
requirements and classification,’’
applicable to § 173.469(d).
We are removing from § 171.7 all
entries that are only listed in §§ 178.356
and 178.358 covering the construction
and use of 20PF and 21PF specification
overpacks, respectively. These
overpacks are no longer authorized in
hazardous materials regulations. We are
also deleting references to 2R vessels,
and any materials incorporated by
reference solely into § 178.360. The
specifications for these packages are
being removed from §§ 178.356,
178.358, and 178.360, respectively, as
discussed below. J. L. Shepherd raised
a concern about a possible effect on
currently issued special permits that
allow use of 2R vessels, but these
changes would not affect existing
special permits.
As a consequence of the removal of
§§ 178.356, 178.358, and 178.360 the
following references are being removed
from the list of matter incorporated by
reference in § 171.7:
• ANSI B16.5–77, Steel Pipe Flanges,
Flanged Fittings, 1977 from
§ 171.7(d)(2),
• AWWA Standard C207–55, Steel
Pipe Flanges, 1955 from § 171.7(i)(1),
• the reference heading for American
Water Works Association from
§ 171.7(i); and
• all listings and the reference
heading for Department of Energy under
§ 171.8(p)
Æ USDOE, CAPE–1662, Revision 1,
and Supplement 1, Civilian Application
Program Engineering Drawings, April 6,
1988, from § 171.7(p)(1)
Æ USDOE, Material and Equipment
Specification No. SP–9, Rev. 1, and
Supplement—Fire Resistant Phenolic
VerDate Mar<15>2010
Foam, March 28, 1968, from
§ 171.7(p)(2)
Æ USDOE, KSS–471,—Proposal for
Modifications to U.S. Department of
Transportation Specification 21PF–1,
Fire and Shock Resistant Phenolic
Foam—Insulated Metal Overpack,
November 30, 1986 from § 171.7(p)(3).
22:43 Jul 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
Section 172.203
This section details additional
description requirements that are
required for certain shipments of
hazardous materials. As proposed in our
NPRM, we are revising § 172.203(d)(2)
to specify that when a material is in
‘‘special form’’ the words ‘‘special form’’
must be included in the description,
unless those words already appear in
the proper shipping name. Lawrence
Laude noted that this change would
require that the offeror have the proper
documentation to declare the material
as special form. We agree, but note that
an offeror of special form Class 7
material is already required to maintain
documentation showing that the
material meets the special form test
requirements in § 173.469 or has an
IAEA Certificate of Competent
Authority showing this (see § 173.476).
Consequently, if such documentation
does not exist, the offeror may not
classify the material as special form. An
offeror who does not have the proper
special form documentation, or does not
wish to classify the material as special
form, has the option to not declare it as
special form.
In our NPRM we proposed that the
activity included on shipping papers
and labels required by § 172.203(d)(3)
should include all parent radionuclides
and daughter products, even those
daughters that have half-lives shorter
than 10 days and not greater than that
of the parent. Several commenters
raised concerns on our proposal.
Lawrence Laude and J.L Shepherd
commented that as proposed the NPRM
changes would require listing multiple
daughter products on the label with
limited space, and create a potential
conflict with the 95 percent requirement
of § 173.433(g). (§ 173.433(g). requires
that those radionuclides that constitute
95% of the total radioactive hazard,
based on nuclide-specific activity/Type
A ratios, to be listed on the shipping
paper) While we did not propose any
changes to the listing of the
radionuclides, but only to the total
activity, we agree this could introduce
confusion between the list and the total.
Lawrence Laude also noted that the
proposed change would introduce an
inconsistency with § 173.433(c)(2) for
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
the calculation of A values for chains
with short-lived daughters as that
paragraph omits short-lived daughters.
Lawrence Laude and J. L. Shepherd
additionally noted that the A1 and A2
values for those radionuclides with
short-lived daughters were derived
taking the presence of the short-lived
daughters into account; adding their
activity would not be a fair comparison
to the A1 and A2 values and would not
be in harmony with TS-R-1. To avoid
confusion with the nuclides to be listed,
and to maintain consistency with the
calculated A1 and A2 values, we are not
adopting the proposed requirement to
include daughter products when those
daughters have half-lives less than 10
days and not greater than that of the
parent.
As proposed in the NPRM, we are also
more closely aligning with the wording
in TS–R–1 by specifying that the
activity should be the maximum activity
of the radioactive contents during
transport. Lawrence Laude agreed with
adding ‘‘maximum’’ to require that the
offeror take into account changes in the
activity due to decay and/or buildup of
daughters, and suggested it would be
useful to include a short explanation of
‘‘maximum’’ in the regulations. We
believe the phrase ‘‘maximum activity
of the radioactive contents contained in
each package during transport’’ is selfexplanatory.
We are also amending § 172.203(d)(3)
to permit the mass of each fissile
nuclide for mixtures to be included
when appropriate, that is, when there is
a mixture present.
Additionally, in § 172.203(d)(4), we
are revising the example to clarify that
the word ‘‘RADIOACTIVE’’ is not
required to be included in the
description of the category of label.
Section 172.310
This section contains additional
marking requirements for packages
containing Class 7 (radioactive)
material. In the NPRM we proposed to
align the marking requirements in this
section with the requirements in
§ 178.350 which references the marking
requirements of § 178. 3. Lawrence
Laude noted that our proposed change
would have the unintended effect of
requiring all Type A packages,
including those with an AF certificate of
compliance, to be marked with ‘‘DOT
7A’’ which is also required by § 178.350.
The commenter also noted that an
alternate approach is to simply change
the current marking size requirements
in § 172.310 to 12 mm (0.47 inches). We
agree and are revising this paragraph
accordingly.
E:\FR\FM\11JYR3.SGM
11JYR3
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 133 / Friday, July 11, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
Section 172.402
This section prescribes additional
labeling requirements for shipments of
hazardous materials. We are revising
paragraph (d)(1) to clarify that for a
package containing a Class 7
(radioactive) material that meets the
definition of one or more additional
hazard classes a subsidiary label is not
required on the package if the nonradioactive material conforms to the
small quantity exception in § 173.4,
excepted quantities exception in
§ 173.4a, or de minimis exceptions in
§ 173.4b. Lawrence Laude suggested
modification to clarify that applicable
packaging and marking requirements for
the subsidiary hazard need not be met.
However, our intent is to except these
packages only from labeling. Regulatory
Resources stated that paragraph (d)(1) is
redundant with the referenced
paragraphs and should be deleted in its
entirety. However we are keeping the
paragraph to provide clarity that the
subsidiary label is not needed in these
situations.
Section 172.403
This section describes labeling
requirements for shipments of Class 7
(radioactive) materials. We are
correcting the reference in paragraph (d)
from § 173.428(d) to § 173.428(e). We
are revising paragraph (g)(2) to be
consistent with the change included
herein for § 172.203(d)(3) to more
closely align with the wording in TS–R–
1 by specifying that the activity should
be the maximum activity of the
radioactive contents during transport. In
response to several comments, and as
discussed under § 172.203(d)(3), we are
not including the word ‘‘total’’ before
‘‘maximum activity’’. Further, we are
amending the activity printing
requirement on the RADIOACTIVE label
to permit the mass of each fissile
nuclide, as appropriate for mixtures, to
be included.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Section 172.504
This section prescribes general
placarding requirements. In the NPRM
we proposed to require placards to be
affixed to conveyances carrying fissile
material packages, unpackaged low
specific activity (LSA) material or
surface contaminated object (SCO) in
category I (i.e., LSA–I and SCO–I
respectively), all conveyances required
by §§ 173.427 and 173.441 to operate
under exclusive use conditions, and all
closed vehicles used in accordance with
§ 173.443(d). This would more closely
align domestic placarding requirements
with those of TS–R–1.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
22:43 Jul 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
Regulatory Resources and Lawrence
Laude stated their belief that packages
bearing a fissile label do not warrant a
radioactive placard, as adequate
controls are provided by packaging and
criticality safety index (CSI) labels.
Lawrence Laude recommended that, if
placarding fissile shipments is
considered necessary, placarding should
be limited to shipments required by
§ 173.457 to be operated under
exclusive use. While adoption of
placarding for all shipments of packages
with fissile labels would be consistent
with the requirements of TS–R–1,
PHMSA recognizes this could be a
burden for shipments of small quantities
of fissile material. We are therefore
adopting the suggested approach to
require placarding only for shipments
required by § 173.457 to be operated
under exclusive use (that is, packages
with CSI greater than 50).
Regulatory Resources stated that
under the proposed requirement, a
shipper cannot ‘‘apply full markings
and labels per 49 CFR 172 Subparts D
and E on a package containing low
specific activity (LSA) material or
surface contaminated objects (SCO) and
ship them as exclusive use unless the
shipper placards the vehicle—regardless
of the label applied.’’ While this is true,
when it is not required to be shipped as
exclusive use, a shipper may apply full
markings and labels per 49 CFR part 172
subparts D and E on a package
containing LSA material or SCO and
choose to not declare the shipment as
exclusive use.
Regulatory Resources and Lawrence
Laude noted that the placarding of all
conveyances required by § 173.441 to
operate under exclusive use would
extend applicability to shipments where
the aggregate transport index (TI) for
packages with Radioactive Yellow II
labels exceeds 50. Regulatory Resources
stated that this would provide little
benefit and would result in large
training costs, though they did not
provide a specific cost estimate. PHMSA
believes there is a safety benefit to
providing a clear indication to
personnel that a package or packages
have TI’s larger than allowed on nonexclusive use shipments. PHMSA
further believes that this benefit will
exceed the costs. For further
information on costs and benefits,
please see the ‘‘placarding’’ and
‘‘benefits of the rule’’ sections of the RIA
placed in the docket for this rulemaking.
Lawrence Laude noted that the use of
the word ‘‘conveyances’’ in our
proposed footnote, at least as defined in
§ 173.403, would require vessels and
aircraft to be placarded, which is not
consistent with § 172.504(a). While the
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40593
definition in § 173.403 does not apply to
§ 172.504(a), we recognize that such an
interpretation could be made. USEC
added that based upon previous letters
of interpretation changes to the existing
text in sections to § 172.504(e) and
§ 173.427 to require only the
conveyance to be placarded and not the
conveyance and the package(s) would
be beneficial. After analyzing the above
comments on the NPRM, we are revising
§ 172.504(e) Table 1 Footnote 1 to read
as set out in the regulatory text of this
rule.
Section 172.505
This section describes when
placarding for subsidiary risks is
required. In paragraph (b), we proposed
to remove the reference to ‘‘low specific
activity uranium hexafluoride’’ to be
consistent with changes to § 173.420(e).
Lawrence Laude noted that the phrase
‘‘non-fissile, fissile-excepted, or fissile
uranium hexafluoride’’ covers all the
possible shipments requiring subsidiary
placarding, so it should suffice to just
refer to ‘‘uranium hexafluoride.’’ We
agree, but choose to list the three
different proper shipping names used
for uranium hexafluoride for clarity.
Part 173
Section 173.4
This section provides requirements
for shipments of small quantities by
highway and rail. We proposed to revise
paragraph (a)(1)(iv) to remove the
reference to § 173.425, as the references
in §§ 173.421 and 173.424 already cite
the activity limits in § 173.425.
Lawrence Laude noted that the
reference to § 173.426 should also be
deleted since, as noted in the preamble,
it also does not specify a dose rate limit.
The commenter also noted that the
current and proposed § 173.4(b) already
invoke §§ 173.421 and 173.424 which
give activity limits for the package,
making the inner receptacle activity
limit references in § 173.4(a)(1)(iv)
redundant. We agree and are removing
paragraph (a)(1)(iv) from § 173.4.
In the NPRM we proposed to revise
paragraph (b) to specify that small
quantities of Class 7 (radioactive)
materials must satisfy the requirements
of §§ 173.421, 173.424, or 173.426 in
their entirety. Lawrence Laude asked for
justification, noting that as proposed,
the change brings in all the
requirements of § 173.422, including the
requirements for notification, training,
and for hazardous waste and hazardous
substances, shipping papers; not just the
marking change highlighted in our
NPRM. We agree and we are revising
paragraph (b) to cite only the previously
E:\FR\FM\11JYR3.SGM
11JYR3
40594
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 133 / Friday, July 11, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
referenced paragraphs while adding the
similar paragraphs of § 173.426. The
commenter also noted that, as currently
written, § 173.4 does not require
shipping papers for small quantity
packages containing hazardous waste or
hazardous substances and suggested
considering whether this needs to be
addressed. General relief applicable to
all hazard classes and divisions was not
proposed in the NPRM, and is outside
the scope of this rulemaking.
Lawrence Laude suggested that
PHMSA should eliminate the marking
requirements of §§ 173.4 and 173.4a for
UN2910 and UN2911 excepted
packages, viewing them as redundant.
We did not propose these changes in the
NPRM and such a change would be
result in a substantive change not
proposed and made available for public
comment. Thus, such a change is
considered outside the scope of this
rulemaking. Commenters are welcome
to petition for change by following the
process detailed in §§ 106.95 and
106.100.
Section 173.25
This section provides requirements
for packages utilizing overpacks. In the
NPRM, we proposed to require the
‘‘OVERPACK’’ marking on all overpacks
containing packages of Class 7
(radioactive) materials, unless package
type markings representative of each
Class 7 package contained therein are
visible from the outside of the overpack.
J.L. Shepherd claimed that the
historical meaning and understanding
by users of Type B packages is that
‘‘overpacks’’ are heat and impact
resistant structures, and thus the term
should not be used for cardboard boxes,
shrink wrap or wooden boxes. However,
we did not propose any change to the
definition of the term ‘‘overpack’’
already found in § 171.8 which does not
preclude the use of cardboard boxes,
shrink wrap, or wooden boxes as
overpacks. The commenter also claimed
that the IAEA has never addressed the
use of ‘‘overpacks’’ related to type B
shipments; however, the IAEA does
define ‘‘overpack’’ in TS–R–1 which
applies to all radioactive material
packages and has marking requirements
for overpacks similar to those proposed
in our NPRM.
Lawrence Laude suggested deletion of
the text ‘‘(Type IP–1, –2, or –3)’’ since
industrial package by definition
includes Type IP–1, –2, or –3. We agree
and have made this change. He also
suggested revisions to § 173.25(a)(6).
However, we did not propose any
changes to that paragraph in the NPRM
and so those changes are outside the
scope of this rulemaking. Clarifications
VerDate Mar<15>2010
22:43 Jul 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
were also requested on several other
portions of this section that were not
within the scope of this rulemaking.
Lawrence Laude asked for clarification
whether an overpack containing only
excepted packages would need to be
marked only with the UN number(s),
consistent with Table 10 of TS–R–1.
This is correct, but we see no needed
changes to the proposed language.
Regulatory Resources also requested we
clarify the overpack marking
requirements in § 173.448(g)(2), which
references subpart D of part 172 and
§ 173.25(a), by removing the reference to
subpart D. Although we agree that,
because the part 172 marking
requirements do not cover overpacks,
this reference is unnecessary, we did
not propose any changes to § 173.448 in
the NPRM so this is outside the scope
of this rulemaking. We may address this
in a future rulemaking.
Section 173.401
This section outlines the scope of
subpart I; subsection (b) specifies
materials that are outside of that scope.
We are modifying § 173.401(b)(4) to add
the phrase ‘‘which are either in their
natural state, or which have only been
processed for purposes other than for
extraction of the radionuclides.’’ We
also added ‘‘or determined in
accordance with § 173.433’’ to account
for calculations for mixtures of
radionuclides. We are also adding a new
paragraph (b)(5) to clarify, based on
internal PHMSA review of existing
requirements, that non-radioactive solid
objects with radioactive substances
present on any surfaces in quantities not
exceeding the limits cited in the
definition of contamination in § 173.403
are not subject to the Class 7
(radioactive) material requirements of
the HMR.
B & W requested that we consider
PHMSA interpretation 06–0274 (issued
May 6, 2008) and add that contaminated
items below the consignment exemption
limits are also not regulated. We believe
this concept is already addressed in the
regulations as referenced in the letter of
interpretation and have not made this
addition. The commenter also requested
that we recognize ‘‘free release’’ limits
that have been established by other
federal agencies. We are not aware of
any other specific codified federal limits
and DOT does not have authority to set
such limits.
Section 173.403
Section 173.403 contains definitions
specific to Class 7 (radioactive)
materials. We are revising the
definitions of ‘‘contamination,’’
‘‘criticality safety index (CSI),’’ ‘‘fissile
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
material,’’ ‘‘low specific activity (LSA)
material,’’ ‘‘radiation level,’’ and
‘‘uranium.’’ NIRS & CACC expressed
‘‘serious concerns’’ with the changes in
the definitions but provided no specific
comments.
We are changing the definition of
‘‘contamination’’ by deleting the word
‘‘radioactive’’ from the present
definitions of ‘‘Fixed radioactive
contamination’’ and ‘‘Non-Fixed
radioactive contamination.’’ In addition,
we are replacing the phrase
‘‘contamination exists in two phases’’
with ‘‘there are two categories of
contamination.’’ Lawrence Laude noted
that we were not consistent in our
subsequent use of the term used for
‘‘non-fixed contamination’’ in the
NPRM, using variations such as ‘‘nonfixed (removable) radioactive surface
contamination,’’ ‘‘removable (non-fixed)
radioactive contamination,’’ and
‘‘removable radioactive surface
contamination.’’ We agree this could
cause confusion, so we are
standardizing by using ‘‘non-fixed
contamination’’ as given in the
definition and have made corresponding
edits to §§ 173.421(c), 173.443, 174.715,
176.715, and 177.843.
We are revising the definition of
‘‘criticality safety index (CSI)’’ to
include the sum of criticality safety
indices of all fissile material packages
contained within a conveyance.
Lawrence Laude suggested that the
language ‘‘(rounded up to the next
tenth)’’ should be deleted from the
definition of CSI as this is effectively
addressed in the referenced sections of
10 CFR part 71 and would seem to
eliminate a valid CSI of zero. The
referenced NRC regulations contain the
same words as our definition, except the
last paragraph which says, ‘‘Any CSI
greater than zero must be rounded up to
the first decimal place.’’ PHMSA is not
adopting the suggestion because we are
consistent with the NRC definition in 10
CFR 71.4, and we reference 10 CFR
71.59 in our definition which includes
the statement, ‘‘Any CSI greater than
zero must be rounded up to the first
decimal place.’’ We are revising the
definition of ‘‘fissile material’’ to align
with NRC’s definition and to clarify that
certain exceptions are provided in
§ 173.453. Lawrence Laude suggested
that we adopt the IAEA definition,
which makes a distinction between
fissile nuclides and fissile material,
rather than the NRC definition. We
choose the NRC definition for domestic
consistency and as we believe it more
precisely defines what is intended by
the regulation.
As proposed we are revising the
definition of ‘‘low specific activity
E:\FR\FM\11JYR3.SGM
11JYR3
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 133 / Friday, July 11, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
(LSA) material’’ to more closely align
with the definitions in TS–R–1 and in
the NRC regulations.
We proposed slight modifications in
the definition of ‘‘package’’ to replace
‘‘Industrial package Type 1 (IP–1) . . .
(IP–2) . . . (IP–3)’’ with ‘‘Industrial
package Type 1 (Type IP–1) . . . (Type
IP–2) . . . (Type IP–3).’’ However, as
Lawrence Laude and USEC noted, we
introduced an error, repeating the word
‘‘together’’ under ‘‘Industrial package.’’
We are now correcting that error and
changing only the references to package
types.
We are revising the definition of
‘‘radiation level’’ to clarify the types of
radiation that contribute to the radiation
level, stating that it consists of the sum
of the dose-equivalent rates from all
types of ionizing radiation present
including alpha, beta, gamma, and
neutron radiation. Energy Solutions
claimed this is inapplicable and overly
burdensome when applied to container/
conveyance release surveys. We do not
use the term ‘‘release survey’’ in the
regulations as DOT does not regulate the
transfer of radioactive materials from
control while ‘‘radiation level’’ limits
are given in §§ 173.441 and 173.443.
The commenter claims that alpha
emitting radionuclides are not a
contributor to external radiation dose
equivalent and are already addressed in
the removable surface contamination
limits prescribed in the rule; he also
claims that low-energy beta emissions
should not be of concern and that it is
not possible to accurately quantify beta
dose at very low levels. We agree that
for a large majority of radioactive
packages, gamma or neutron radiation is
the only significant contributor to dose
at one meter from the surface of the
package and although low energy beta
emissions are typically more difficult to
measure or might contribute little or
even nothing to the radiation level, it is
still possible and appropriate to
measure their contribution, or the
absence of any contribution, in order to
ensure radiological safety.
However there are a few packages
where neutrons must be considered (as
noted in the current definition), and
alpha and beta radiation should also be
considered in meeting the regulatory
requirements. The commenter proposed
a new definition of ‘‘Release Survey
Effective Radiation Dose Equivalent;’’
we do not believe such a term is needed.
We are revising the definition of
‘‘uranium’’ to include natural uranium
that has not been chemically separated
from accompanying constituents.
Lawrence Laude said we should
consider deleting ‘‘(which may be
chemically separated)’’ as unnecessary.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
22:43 Jul 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
While this is true, we prefer to leave the
words in for clarification.
B & W suggested we also change the
§ 173.403 definition of ‘‘low toxicity
alpha emitters’’ to be consistent with the
NRC and IAEA definitions. However,
we did not propose such a change in the
NPRM. We may consider changing the
definition in a future rulemaking.
USEC suggested that we add a
definition of ‘‘overpack’’ to § 173.403
specifically for radioactive material,
separate from the definition of
‘‘overpack’’ in § 171.8. While the
definition in § 171.8 is different than the
definition in the TS–R–1 we do not see
a need for change at this time. We did
not propose such a change in the NPRM
and believe that multiple definitions
within the regulations are unnecessary.
Section 173.410
This section describes general design
requirements for packages used to ship
Class 7 (radioactive) materials. In
paragraph (i)(3), we are revising the
requirement for transporting liquid
Class 7 (radioactive) material by air to
specify that the package must be capable
of withstanding, without leakage (i.e.,
without release of radioactive material),
a pressure differential of not less than
the ‘‘maximum normal operating
pressure’’ (defined in § 173.403) plus 95
kPa (13.8. psi). The HMR currently
require a package to be capable of
withstanding a pressure differential of
not less than 95 kPa. We are adding the
maximum normal operating pressure
(defined in § 173.403) to account for the
contribution of internally generated gas
pressure to the overall pressure
differential.
USEC suggested we change ‘‘13.8 psi’’
to ‘‘13.8 psia.’’ We are not making this
change, because ‘‘psi’’ is consistent with
similar usage in § 173.27 and other
sections of the HMR. Furthermore, the
differential pressure may be either
absolute or gage pressure, as long as
both points are measured in the same
units.
Section 173.411
Section 173.411 provides
transportation requirements for
industrial packagings. We are making
several editorial revisions to improve
consistency with the nomenclature used
for package types, and to clarify the
meaning of two authorized alternatives
to Type IP–2 or IP–3 packages. We are
replacing the word ‘‘packaging’’ with
‘‘package’’ in each place it appears in
this section. We are also replacing the
terms IP–1, IP–2, and IP–3 with Type
IP–1, Type IP–2, and Type IP–3 to make
the designations for industrial packages
more consistent with the language used
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40595
in the HMR for other Class 7
(radioactive) material package types,
such as Type A and Type B(U).
We proposed modifying the
requirement that tests for Type IP–2 and
Type IP–3 packages must not result in
a significant increase in the external
surface radiation levels, with wording to
indicate that the package tests must not
result in more than a 20% increase in
the maximum radiation level at any
external surface of the package,
consistent with the § 173.411
requirements for tank containers, tanks,
freight containers, and metal
intermediate bulk containers that are
used as Type IP–2 or Type IP–3
packages. Penn State and Lawrence
Laude stated that the 20% criterion
could be difficult to meet for low-doserate packages. Regulatory Resources
questioned the need for change as we
had not previously adopted the IAEA
approach. Regulatory Resources claimed
there is already a quantified external
package surface dose rate increase limit
in § 173.441. However, that section
provides the upper limits on allowable
dose rates, whereas this criterion relates
to the ability of the package design to
maintain its shielding effectiveness in
normal conditions of transport.
Lawrence Laude stated that the
proposed change would necessitate a
review of all designs in domestic use
and would entail large costs for little
benefit. We agree that compliance with
the 20% criterion could be burdensome
for very low-dose-rate packages and that
consideration needs to be given to use
of previously allowable packages. Due
to the issues raised we are not adopting
the change to 20% at this time.
However, we are not deleting the
existing requirements in § 173.441 for
tanks, freight containers, and
intermediate bulk containers to meet the
20% limit and are revising the language
in § 173.411 to be consistent with TS–
R–1.
For consistency with the language in
TS–R–1, in § 173.411(b)(4) we are
replacing the phrases in paragraphs
(b)(4), (b)(5), (b)(6) and (b)(7), ‘‘designed
to satisfy’’ or ‘‘designed to conform to’’
certain requirements with the words,
‘‘meet’’ or ‘‘designed to meet.’’ In the
NPRM we proposed to use the term
‘‘satisfy,’’ but after further consideration
we believe it is clearer and simpler to
instead replace the phrases in question
with ‘‘meets,’’ which is also consistent
with the language in TS–R–1.
USEC suggested that in both existing
§ 173.411(b)(4)(iii) and in proposed
§ 173.411(b)(5)(ii) we indicate ‘‘38.4
psia,’’ rather than ‘‘37.1 psig’’ as the
U.S. standard or customary unit
E:\FR\FM\11JYR3.SGM
11JYR3
40596
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 133 / Friday, July 11, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
equivalent to 265 kPa. We agree and are
making these changes.
In § 173.411(b)(5) we are removing
references to DOT Specification IM–101
and IM–102 steel portable tanks as Type
IP–2 or IP–3 packages because they are
no longer listed in Part 178 of the HMR
and authorization for their use
terminated on January 1, 2010 (although
their use would still be permitted if it
can be shown that they meet the
requirements of § 173.411(b)(4)). We are
revising § 173.411(b)(5) to contain the
TS–R–1 requirements for cargo tanks
and tank cars.
In paragraph (c), we are extending the
retention period for Type IP–2 and Type
IP–3 package documentation from one
year to two years after the offeror’s latest
shipment, to correspond to the
minimum period an offeror is required
to retain copies of shipping papers.
Regulatory Resources noted that the
shipper of a package may not be the
manufacturer of the package; in these
instances, the commenter suggested that
the documentation requirements should
be placed on the manufacturer rather
than the user/shipper. However, since
Part 173 only applies to shippers, any
requirement on manufacturers would
need to be placed in Part 178.
Furthermore, we are not introducing a
new documentation requirement here,
but only extending the required
retention period. The commenter also
suggested a delayed compliance
timeframe to allow use of existing
documentation requirements. We feel
that this provision can be met by the
delayed compliance date of this rule.
Section 173.412
This section prescribes additional
design requirements for Type A
packages. We are changing § 173.412(f)
to require the containment system of a
Type A package to be capable of
retaining its contents under the
reduction of ambient pressure to 60 kPa
(8.7 psi) instead of the current 25 kPa
(3.6 psi). Lawrence Laude expressed
support for the change on the ground
that it was more representative of the
reduced pressures that could be
experienced in ground transportation.
J.L. Shepherd asked whether we would
require the retesting of current Type A
packages or provide a transition period.
PHMSA believes that since packages
currently have to withstand a reduction
in ambient pressure from 100 kPa to 25
kPa, they should already be able to meet
the new requirement (the old
requirement was to withstand a
reduction of 75 kPA (100 to 25 kpa), but
now a reduction of only 40 kPa (100 kPa
to 60 kPa) will be required). USEC
suggested that we should use 8.7 psia
VerDate Mar<15>2010
22:43 Jul 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
instead of 60 kPa for clarity; we agree
and have made this change.
We proposed revising § 173.412(j)(2)
to specify that the maximum radiation
level at the external surface of the
package not increase by more than 20%.
We received multiple comments on this
proposal similar to those on the change
proposed in § 173.411; as discussed
above, due to the issues raised we are
not adopting the change to 20% at this
time.
Paragraph (k)(3) sets forth
requirements for the retention of liquid
contents in a Type A package. To
provide further clarity, we are adopting
the revised wording in TS–R–1, which
states that a packaging designed for
liquids must ‘‘Have a containment
system composed of primary inner and
secondary outer containment
components designed to enclose the
liquid contents completely and ensure
their retention within the secondary
outer component in the event that the
primary inner component leaks.’’
Section 173.415
This section discusses authorized
Type A packages. We proposed to
extend the retention period for Type A
package documentation from one year to
two years after the offeror’s latest
shipment, to correspond to the
minimum period for which an offeror is
currently required to retain copies of
shipping papers. We also proposed to
include more detailed language
describing the kinds of information
expected to be included as part of the
Type A package documentation.
While we received support from some
commenters for the two-year retention
period, Lawrence Laude requested that
there be a delayed compliance period to
accommodate shipments made more
than one year prior to the effective date
of the final rule and for which the
documentation is no longer available.
Several commenters (Veolia, J. L
Shepherd, Lawrence Laude, and Penn
State) expressed concern that current
Type A package documentation would
not meet the new requirements, and that
any new requirements would invalidate
the use of such packages until the
documentation could be developed.
Several commenters (Veolia, J. L
Shepherd, Lawrence Laude, and Penn
State) suggested a phase-in period be
authorized for Type A packages
currently in use until additional
detailed documentation is available.
We agree that there may be a need for
a transition period until the two-year
retention period takes effect. We also
agree that time may be needed to review
and upgrade documentation. Therefore,
we are not requiring compliance with
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
the revised documentation requirements
until January 1, 2017.
Veolia stated that the offeror of a Type
A package should be able to use
additional shielding or packing
materials inside that package beyond
that described in the package’s
documentation. We disagree. The
current regulations require the
packaging to be tested ‘‘as normally
prepared for transport’’ which means
shielding must be considered;
additional shielding could change how
the package performs and thus would
need to be evaluated.
Penn State stated that providing
engineering drawings of a package for a
one-time-only shipment would increase
the cost from negligible to significant
with no added benefit and suggested
that minimal documentation was
required in such instances. However,
the current regulations require even
single use packages to be appropriately
evaluated and documented. We agree
that for some packages, engineering
drawings may not be necessary, so we
are not requiring engineering drawings
in this final rule.
QSA Global and Penn State noted that
in some instances, such as when a
manufacturer ships a Type A package to
a customer and the customer
subsequently uses the package,
following the manufacturer’s
instructions for the evaluated contents,
the customer should be able to rely
upon a certification from the
manufacturer. Examples given include
radiopharmaceuticals, sealed sources,
instruments and gauges. In such
instances, the shipper complies with the
package assembly and closure
instructions provided by the package
manufacturer without modifying the
design of the package system or contents
except as authorized by the manufacture
(e.g., various sources authorized for a
given packaging system). It should be
noted that under the existing
requirements of § 173.415, the offeror
must maintain the complete
documentation.
QSA Global stated that full Type A
package documentation files for
reusable containers can be thousands of
pages in length and contain information
considered proprietary and confidential.
The company currently maintains
documentation on numerous packages
used for Type A transport, and claims
to provide sufficient information to
ensure that users are aware of
limitations associated with content,
form and weight. The company also
notes that there are hundreds of users of
their Type A package designs, and
recommended that shippers of Type A
specification packages be required to
E:\FR\FM\11JYR3.SGM
11JYR3
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 133 / Friday, July 11, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
maintain package assembly instructions
and obtain a Type A specification
certification for the package from the
packaging manufacturer.
Under the existing § 178.350, the term
‘‘packaging manufacturer’’ means the
person certifying that the package meets
all requirements of that section, which
can often be the offeror, especially if the
packaging or contents have been altered
from that evaluated by another party.
However, we agree that there are
instances where the offeror is provided
a packaging from another source for a
particular set of contents and should not
be considered to be the packaging
manufacturer. Therefore, as an optional
alternative to the current and revised
requirement for offerors to maintain
complete package documentation we are
also including an option for offerors
who receive a packaging from another
party acting as the manufacturer, to rely
on a manufacturer’s certification. This
certification would include a signed
statement from the manufacturer
affirming that the package meets all the
requirements of § 178.350 for the
radioactive contents presented for
transport. This alternative creates no
obligation on manufacturers to supply
such a certification; it is merely an
option available if an offeror is able to
obtain the certification from the
manufacturer. In such instances, the
offeror will also be required to maintain
a copy of the manufacturer’s
certification, and if requested by DOT,
be able to obtain a copy of the complete
documentation from the manufacturer.
However, if the offeror has modified the
packaging or contents from that
evaluated and documented by the other
party, the offeror must perform an
evaluation of the changes and then
maintain the complete documentation
which must be provided to DOT on
request. This will enable users to reuse
packagings expressly made for certain
contents and rely on documentation
from another party acting as the
manufacturer, but does not allow them
to modify the packaging or contents
without a documented evaluation of
those changes.
Section 173.416
This section discusses authorized
Type B packages. We are removing the
present paragraph (c), which allowed
the continued use of an existing Type B
packaging constructed to DOT
specification 6M, 20WC, or 21WC until
October 1, 2008, and replacing it with
a new paragraph (c) to authorize the
domestic shipment of a package
conducted under a special package
authorization granted by the U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission in
VerDate Mar<15>2010
22:43 Jul 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
accordance with 10 CFR 71.41(d). That
NRC provision is only applicable to
limited, one-time shipments of large
components that cannot be shipped
inside a certified package, or for which
designing a packaging would be
impracticable due to their large size.
J. L. Shepherd requested that we
maintain reference to the obsolete
specification packages to allow
continued use of those packages under
special permits, but removal of this
paragraph would have no impact on any
such special permits. Lawrence Laude
requested that we specify what proper
shipping name should be used for
packages authorized by this new
paragraph. In the rulemaking
establishing 10 CFR 71.41(d), the NRC
stated that, for a package approved
under that paragraph, the NRC will
issue a Certificate of Compliance or
other approval (i.e., special package
authorization letter). In those cases
where the NRC issues a certificate, the
proper shipping name will be associated
with the certificate (e.g., ‘‘Radioactive
material, Type B(M) package, non-fissile
or fissile-excepted). In instances where
the NRC issues a special package
authorization letter, the proper shipping
name will be ‘‘Radioactive material,
transported under special arrangement,
non-fissile or fissile-excepted’’.
Section 173.417
This section discusses authorized
fissile materials packages. We are
removing the present paragraph (c),
which allows the continued use of an
existing fissile material packaging
constructed to DOT specification 6L,
6M, or 1A2 until October 1, 2008. We
are also removing the references to 20
PF and 21PF overpacks in paragraphs
(a)(3), (b)(3),and (b)(3)(ii) in Table 3
because those overpacks are no longer
in service.
We are adding a new paragraph (c) to
authorize the domestic shipment of a
package conducted under a special
package authorization granted by the
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission in
accordance with 10 CFR 71.41(d).
Lawrence Laude requested that we
specify what proper shipping name
should be used for packages authorized
by this new paragraph. In those cases
where the NRC issues a certificate, the
proper shipping name will be associated
with the certificate (e.g., ‘‘Radioactive
material, Type B(M) package, fissile). In
instances where the NRC issues a
special package authorization letter, the
proper shipping name will be
‘‘Radioactive material, transported
under special arrangement, fissile.’’
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40597
Section 173.420
Section 173.420 sets forth
requirements for uranium hexafluoride
(fissile, fissile excepted and non-fissile).
We are removing and reserving
paragraph (a)(2)(ii), which refers to
specifications for DOT–106A multi-unit
tank car tanks as these multi-unit tank
car tanks are not used, nor planned to
be used for transporting UF6.
We had proposed to add the
specification 30C package to the table in
§ 173.420(a)(2)(iii)(D). However, as
USEC pointed out, the 30C cylinder is
not a Section VIII ASME pressure vessel
but is an ANSI N14.1 packaging.
Therefore, we are not adding it to the
table.
USEC suggested that in
173.420(a)(3)(i) we should change ‘‘200
psi’’ to ‘‘200 psia’’ and in 173.420(a)(6)
we should change ‘‘14.8 psig’’ to ‘‘14.7
psia’’. For the first reference, the ANSI
standard referenced in this section uses
psig, not psia, thus we are not adopting
the suggested change, but are changing
it to ‘‘200 psig’’ instead. We do agree
with the second suggestion as these
packages are required to be shipped
with an internal pressure less than
atmosphere, and so we are adopting this
change.
We proposed adding a paragraph (e)
to require that, when there is more than
one way to describe a UF6 shipment, the
proper shipping name and UN number
for the uranium hexafluoride should
take precedence (e.g., the uranium
hexafluoride shipping description
should take precedence over the
shipping description for LSA material).
Lawrence Laude noted that while the
bullet-list summary of changes in the
NPRM stated that this change would
apply only to shipments of 0.1 kg or
more of UF6, our later discussion and
draft text applied the change to all
quantities. Lawrence Laude and USEC
requested that this paragraph only apply
to packages with 0.1 kg or more of UF6,
allowing small packages of uranium
hexafluoride to be re-classed as Class 8
in accordance with § 173.423. We note
that because we are harmonizing with
the 2009 edition of the IAEA
regulations, and this point has been
raised regarding interpretation of the
corresponding paragraph in TS–R–1, we
will limit application of this paragraph
to packages of 0.1 kg or more of UF6. As
the IAEA is working to clarify
application of this requirement to
packages of less than 0.1 kg of UF6, we
may consider changes to this
requirement in a future rulemaking.
E:\FR\FM\11JYR3.SGM
11JYR3
40598
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 133 / Friday, July 11, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
Section 173.421
This section outlines requirements for
excepted packages for limited quantities
of Class 7 (radioactive) materials.
Presently, § 173.421(b) permits excepted
packages of limited quantities of
radioactive material that are a reportable
quantity of hazardous substance or
waste to be shipped without having to
comply with § 172.203(d) or
§ 172.204(c)(4). We are extending this
relief from these shipping paper
requirements to all excepted packages
that are a hazardous substance or waste
by removing § 173.421(b) and adding
the exclusion from §§ 172.203(d) and
172.204(c)(4) to § 173.422.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Section 173.422
Section 173.422 sets forth additional
requirements for excepted packages
containing Class 7 (radioactive)
materials. PHMSA is revising the
introductory text to specify that a small
quantity of another hazard class
transported by highway or rail (as
defined in § 173.4) that would otherwise
qualify for shipment as a Class 7
(radioactive) material in an excepted
package must also satisfy the
requirements of § 173.422. Lawrence
Laude suggested that we also add
excepted quantities as defined in
§ 173.4a. However such packages are
currently covered by § 173.4a(a)(3).
As noted above, § 173.421(b) currently
permits excepted packages of limited
quantities of radioactive material that
are a hazardous substance or hazardous
waste to be shipped without having to
comply with § 172.203(d) or
§ 172.204(c)(4). We are extending this
relief from shipping paper requirements
to include those excepted packages that
contain a hazardous substance or
hazardous waste by moving the
exclusion from § 172.203(d) and
§ 172.204(c)(4) provisions to
§ 173.422(e). In the discussion in our
NPRM, we stated that we were
proposing to add an exclusion from
§ 172.202(a)(5) for such packages;
however, in the draft of the regulatory
text we referenced § 172.202(a)(6)
instead. Lawrence Laude suggested that
we should include both paragraphs; we
agree and are including both.
We are also adding to § 173.422(a) a
requirement that all excepted packages
whose contents meet the definition of a
hazardous substance, be marked with
the letters ‘‘RQ’’. This will provide
consistency with existing marking
requirements for a package containing a
hazardous substance. Lawrence Laude
and Regulatory Resources noted that to
be consistent with § 172.324, this
should only apply to non-bulk excepted
VerDate Mar<15>2010
22:43 Jul 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
packages, we agree and have made that
change.
Section 173.423
Section 173.423 prescribes
requirements for multiple hazard
limited quantity Class 7 materials.
Lawrence Laude suggested several
changes to § 173.423. However, as we
did not propose any changes to that
section in the NPRM, we are not
adopting his proposals in this final rule.
Section 173.427
This section prescribes transport
requirements for low specific activity
(LSA) Class 7 (radioactive) material and
surface contaminated objects (SCO). In
the introductory paragraph of
§ 173.427(a), we are changing the phrase
‘‘LSA material and SCO . . . must be
packaged’’ to ‘‘LSA material and SCO
must be transported.’’ This should help
clarify that paragraphs (c) and (d) apply
to subcategories of LSA material or SCO,
specifically unpackaged LSA material or
SCO, and LSA or SCO which require
packaging in accordance with NRC
requirements in 10 CFR 71. NIRS and
CACC opposed provisions in the
proposed changes that remove
packaging requirements for some SCO;
however, this is a misunderstanding of
these changes as no packaging changes
were proposed. Lawrence Laude noted
that for consistency, § 173.427(a)(2)
should read ‘‘LSA material and SCO’’
instead of ‘‘LSA and SCO material,’’ and
we are adopting that correction.
In § 173.427(a)(6)(v), we are removing
the placarding exception for shipments
of unconcentrated uranium or thorium
ores. The increased communication
requirement is intended to compensate
for the fact that packaging requirements
are minimal for these materials. We are
also clarifying that all of the placarding
requirements of subpart F of part 172
must be met by rewording this
paragraph from referring to vehicle
placarding, to requiring appropriate
placarding of the shipment.
In § 173.427(a)(6)(vi), we proposed to
require that when LSA material or SCO
are shipped in accordance with that
paragraph and contain a subsidiary
hazard from another hazard class,
§ 172.402(d) labeling requirements for
the subsidiary hazard would apply.
Presently, § 173.427(a)(6)(vi) excepts
such shipments from all marking and
labeling requirements, other than for the
stenciling or marking as
‘‘RADIOACTIVE—LSA’’ or
‘‘RADIOACTIVE—SCO,’’ as appropriate.
Lawrence Laude noted that it is unclear
how labels would be applied to
unpackaged material, how many labels
would be required, and whether labels
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
or placards would be required for bulk
packages with a volumetric capacity
greater than 18 m3 (640 ft3). The
commenter also claimed the proposed
change has the potential for conflicting
with the proposed change to
§ 172.402(d)(1) regarding not requiring
subsidiary labels for Class 7 packages
with subsidiary hazards meeting the
requirements of §§ 173.4, 173.4a, and
173.4b. While this change cannot
conflict with the new § 172.402(d), to
which paragraph (a)(6)(vi) makes
reference, the concerns on labeling of
unpackaged material are valid.
Therefore, we are amending this change
to apply only to packaged material; for
larger bulk packages, labels or placards
could be used as required in § 172.400.
Lawrence Laude further claimed that
portions of the proposed (and existing)
§ 173.427(a)(6) are either redundant or
inconsistent with other requirements of
subpart I and recommended that
paragraphs (a)(6)(i) through (v) be
deleted, that only paragraph (a)(6)(vi) be
retained, and that paragraph (a)(6)(vii)
be moved to a new paragraph (b)(6) or,
alternately, a new paragraph (f).
However, § 173.427(a)(6) does contain
some unique requirements, and the
changes suggested would be beyond the
scope of what was proposed in the
NPRM, so we are not adopting them.
We are revising paragraph (b)(1) to
replace ‘‘IP–1, IP–2, or IP–3’’ with
‘‘Type IP–1, Type IP–2, or Type IP–3,’’
to coincide more closely with the IAEA
nomenclature in TS–R–1.
In the NPRM we proposed to
rearrange the wording in paragraph
(b)(4), to indicate that for an exclusive
use shipment of less than an A2
quantity, the packaging must meet the
requirements of § 173.24a or § 173.24b,
depending on whether the packaging
would be considered non-bulk or bulk
according to the definition in § 171.8.
Lawrence Laude noted that the
reference to §§ 173.24a and 173.24b is
redundant since the introductory text of
§ 173.410, which is also referenced,
includes a requirement to meet subparts
A and B of part 173, and §§ 173.24a and
173.24b are included in subpart B. We
agree and are revising this paragraph to
reference only § 173.410. Lawrence
Laude also commented that we should
address issues related to bulk Type A
and Type B packages. However, we did
not propose such changes in the NPRM.
In paragraph (b)(5), we are
withdrawing the explicit authorization
for certain DOT Specification tank cars
and cargo tanks, and replacing it with
the general authorization for use of
portable tanks, cargo tanks and tank cars
as provided in § 173.411. The
previously authorized DOT
E:\FR\FM\11JYR3.SGM
11JYR3
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 133 / Friday, July 11, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
Specification tank cars and cargo tanks
are seldom used and the § 173.411
requirements provided by this
rulemaking offer a broader range of
options.
In § 173.427(c)(3), we are changing the
phrase ‘‘where it is suspected that nonfixed contamination exists’’ to ‘‘where it
is reasonable to suspect that non-fixed
contamination exists’’ to clarify that the
shipper must have a justifiable reason if
it decides that it is not necessary to take
measures to ensure that contamination
from SCO–I is not released into the
conveyance or the environment.
We proposed adding a new paragraph
(c)(4) to require that when unpackaged
LSA–I material or SCO–I required to be
transported as exclusive use is
contained in receptacles or wrapping
materials, the outer surfaces of the
receptacles or wrapping materials must
be marked ‘‘RADIOACTIVE LSA–I’’ or
‘‘RADIOACTIVE SCO–I’’ as appropriate.
We proposed an additional new
paragraph (c)(5) to require that all
highway or rail conveyances carrying
unpackaged SCO–I be placarded.
USACE noted that paragraph (c)(4)
would not provide hazard
communication when a liner is shipped
inside a transport vehicle (e.g. rail
gondola) or an intermodal container and
suggested that the outside of the
transport vehicle and/or the receptacle
or intermodal container would be the
only place the marking should be
required. We agree that the proposed
markings could be obscured and we
note that conveyance marking is already
covered by § 173.427(a)(vi); hence we
are not including this suggestion in the
final rule. Lawrence Laude suggested
that for consistency with other usage,
the proposed § 173.427(c)(5) should
refer to ‘‘transport vehicle’’ rather than
‘‘highway or rail conveyance.’’
However, conveyance includes freight
containers, which sometimes need to be
placarded. Lawrence Laude also asked
for clarification that the placarding
requirement of paragraph (c)(5) applies
to non-exclusive use shipments of SCO–
I made in accordance with paragraph
(c)(2), whereas for other LSA material
and SCO shipments, placards are only
required for exclusive use shipments.
Mr. Laude is correct, in this final rule,
the placarding required in paragraph
(c)(4) would only apply to exclusive use
shipments, except for those SCO–I nonexclusive use shipments cited in
paragraph (c)(2).
We are modifying Table 5 by adding
a separate column for conveyances
traveling by inland waterways, in which
the authorized activity limits for
combustible solids, liquids and gases of
LSA–II and LSA–III and SCO would be
VerDate Mar<15>2010
22:43 Jul 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
10% of those for other types of
conveyances. NIRS & CACC asserted
that this change could weaken existing
regulations and opposed a change.
However, these are newly added and
more restrictive requirements so they do
not ‘‘weaken’’ the regulations. In Table
6, we are replacing the terms IP–1, IP–
2, and IP–3 with Type IP–1, Type IP–
2, and Type IP–3 to be consistent with
the similar changes made in § 173.411.
Section 173.433
Section 173.433 sets forth
requirements for determining
radionuclide values, and for listing
radionuclides on shipping papers and
labels. In the NPRM, we proposed to
revise paragraphs (b), (c), (d)(3), and (h)
Tables 7 and 8.
We are revising paragraph (b) to
clarify the use of line 3 in Tables 7 and
8 when no relevant data are available.
Currently, paragraph (b) allows use of
Table 7 for values of A1 and A2 and
Table 8 for exemption values when the
individual radionuclides are not listed
in §§ 173.435 or 173.436. Tables 7 and
8 also indicate values that may be used
when ‘‘No relevant data are available,’’
but there is no reference in the text to
when those entries may be used.
We are revising paragraph (c)(1) to
conform to the current wording in TS–
R–1 that ‘‘it is permissible to use an A2
value calculated using a dose coefficient
for the appropriate lung absorption
type.’’ We are also adding language to
paragraph (c) to clarify that this method
of calculation only applies to the
alternative specified in paragraph (b)(2),
which requires approval by the
Associate Administrator, or for
international transportation, multilateral
approval from the appropriate
Competent Authorities.
We are revising paragraph (d)(3) to
correct incorrect references to other
paragraphs. Currently, the explanation
of the symbols in paragraph (d)(3) refers
to paragraph (d)(2) and itself. We are
revising it to refer to paragraphs (d)(1)
and (d)(2).
We are modifying the second category
descriptions in both Tables 7 and 8,
which presently read ‘‘Only alpha
emitting nuclides are known to be
present.’’ To conform as nearly as
possible to the current wording in TS–
R–1, we are replacing the current
wording with ‘‘Alpha emitting nuclides,
but no beta, gamma, or neutron emitters,
are known to be present’’ (in Table 7),
and ‘‘Alpha emitting nuclides, but no
neutron emitters, are known to be
present’’ (in Table 8).
In Table 7 we are also adding a
footnote for the case when alpha
emitters and beta or gamma emitters but
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40599
no neutron emitters are known to be
present. The reason for this footnote is
that the IAEA default A1 value for the
case when alpha emitters are known to
be present is larger than the value when
only beta or gamma emitters are known
to be present; the footnote entry clarifies
that if both alpha and beta or gamma
emitters are present, the lower default
A1 value should be used. The lesser A1
default value that would be prescribed
in this case would be the more logical
and conservative choice. The third
category presently reads ‘‘No relevant
data are available,’’ we are replacing it
with ‘‘Neutron emitting nuclides are
known to be present or no relevant data
are available.’’ The revised wording
clarifies that if there are different default
values for different types of radiation,
the smaller, most conservative value for
the types of radiation known to be
present should be used. Regulatory
Resources questioned how an A1 value
can be assigned when there are no
relevant data concerning the nuclide(s);
it is done by assigning a value that is
equal to the lowest entry for nuclides
listed in the table in § 173.435.
Section 173.435
This section contains the table of A1
and A2 values for the most commonly
transported radionuclides. We are
revising the table as follows:
• In the entry for Cf-252, in column
1, the reference to footnote (h) is
removed, and in columns 3 and 4, the
A1 value is revised (this adopts the new
TS–R–1 value for A1, which is the same
as previously allowed by domestic
exception in footnote (h) and eliminates
the domestic exception for A2);
• A1 and A2 values and the intrinsic
specific activity for Krypton-79 (Kr-79)
are added to the table; the A values were
calculated using the Q system, and
added to TS–R–1 in its 2009 edition,
and the specific activity calculated from
the relation specific activity in Bq/g =
0.693 times Avogadro’s number divided
by the half-life in seconds times the
atomic mass; and
• In the footnotes to the table,
footnote (a) is revised to add a reference
to TS–R–1 Table 2’s list of daughter
products, footnote (c) is revised to
clarify that the comparison of ‘‘output’’
activity to the A-values is restricted to
special form sources of Ir-192, and
footnote (h) is removed for the Cf-252
entry, as discussed above, and reserved.
NIRS and CACC said they oppose
weakening of definitions and increases
in exemption levels. However, these are
not changes to exemption levels but are
corrections and clarifications.
Regulatory Resources suggested that
the tables in §§ 173.435 and 173.436 be
E:\FR\FM\11JYR3.SGM
11JYR3
40600
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 133 / Friday, July 11, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
combined into a single table. We prefer
to keep the current format in order to
maintain all the current content without
reducing readability.
Section 173.436
This section contains exempt material
activity concentrations and exempt
consignment activity limits for
radionuclides. To reflect corresponding
changes in TS–R–1, we are revising the
total consignment activity exemption for
Tellurium-121m (Te-121m), from 1 ×
105 Bq to 1 × 106 Bq, and we are adding
an entry for Krypton-79 (Kr-79). We are
also revising the list of parent nuclides
and their progeny listed in secular
equilibrium in footnote (b) to the table.
The chains for parents Cerium-134 (Ce134), Radon-220 (Rn-220), Thorium-226
(Th-226), and Uranium 240 (U-240) are
removed. We are adding an entry for
Silver-108m (Ag-108m).
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Section 173.443
This section prescribes contamination
control provisions. Paragraph (a)
provides that the level of non-fixed
contamination ‘‘must be kept as low as
resonabl[y] achievable’’ and specifies
alternative methods for determining the
level of non-fixed contamination, which
may not exceed certain permissible
limits. The remaining paragraphs of
§ 173.443 address situations under
which a higher level of non-fixed
contamination is allowed;
• When a closed transport vehicle is
used only for transportation by highway
or rail of Class 7 (radioactive) material,
the contamination level on the package
may be as great as ten times the
applicable limit specified in paragraph
(a) if (1) a survey shows that the
radiation dose rate at any point does not
exceed specified values; (2) the outside
of the vehicle is stenciled on both sides
with the words ‘‘For Radioactive
Materials Use Only’’ at least three
inches high; and (3) the vehicle is kept
closed excluding loading or unloading.
• Alternatively, if a package is
transported as an ‘‘exclusive use’’
shipment by rail or highway, the level
of non-fixed contamination on a
package during the course of
transportation may be as much as ten
times the applicable limit specified in
paragraph (a) so long as:
Æ At the beginning of transport, the
level of non-fixed contamination on the
package does not exceed the applicable
limit set forth in paragraph (a); and
Æ the transport vehicle is surveyed
and is not returned to service until the
radiation does rate at each accessible
surface does not exceed a specified
value and there is no significant
VerDate Mar<15>2010
22:43 Jul 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
removable (non-fixed) surface
contamination.
Paragraph (a)
The alternative methods for
determining the level of non-fixed
contamination are currently set forth in
paragraphs (a)(1) and (2). In the NPRM,
we proposed to redesignate these two
paragraphs as paragraphs (a)(1)(i) and
(a)(1)(ii), respectively, and provide in
new paragraph (a)(2) that a ‘‘conveyance
used for non-exclusive use shipments is
not required to be surveyed unless there
is reason to suspect that it may exhibit
contamination.’’ We also proposed to
apply the existing requirement that the
level of non-fixed (removable)
radioactive contamination on the
external surfaces of each package be
kept as low as reasonably achievable on
the external and internal surfaces of an
overpack, freight container, tank,
intermediate bulk container (IBC), or
conveyance—but not to the internal
surfaces of a conveyance, freight
container, tank or IBC dedicated to the
transport of unpackaged radioactive
material in accordance with § 173.427(c)
and remaining under that specific
exclusive use. This change ensures that
any associated transportation equipment
utilized for transportation does not
exhibit excessive levels of non-fixed
(removable) radioactive contamination
and aligns the domestic contamination
control requirements with international
standards in TS–R–1.
In response to comments from
Lawrence Laude and Regulatory
Resources that the contamination levels
should not apply to the interior surfaces
of packages, we are clarifying that the
contamination control requirements in
paragraph (a) do not apply to the
interior surfaces of (1) a tank,
intermediate bulk container or other
‘‘package,’’ or (2) a conveyance or
freight container dedicated to the
transport of unpackaged LSA–1 material
and SCO–1 in accordance with
§ 173.427(c) and remaining under that
exclusive use.
In Table 9, which is referenced in the
new § 173.443(a)(1)(i), we are changing
the contamination limits in the column
labeled dpm/cm2 from 220 to 240 for
contamination due to beta and gamma
emitters and low toxicity alpha emitters,
and from 22 to 24 for contamination due
to all other alpha emitting nuclides,
respectively. This will provide the
correct conversions from the 4 and 0.4
Bq/cm2 values. Lawrence Laude also
raised additional concerns with our
proposed changes to § 173.443(a):
• Mr. Laude inquired whether we
should adopt any limit on fixed
contamination, because we only
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
addressed non-fixed contamination. We
do not believe it is necessary or
practical to impose fixed contamination
limits on conveyances, overpacks, or
freight containers being used for
radioactive material transport, as
radiation levels from the Class 7
material would make this practice
difficult and unduly expensive, if not
impossible to implement. It would also
be unnecessary since the other transport
controls for the declared hazard of the
packaged or unpackaged radioactive
material provides sufficient protection.
Moreover, once these conveyances,
overpacks, or freight containers are no
longer used for transport of Class 7
material, they become subject to the
HMR independently for possible
radioactive material classification to
address any possible fixed
contamination hazard.
• Mr. Laude inquired whether the
first sentence of the proposed paragraph
(a)(1) should be limited to conveyances
to be consistent with § 173.427(c),
which prescribes requirements for
shipping LSA–I and SCO–I in
conveyances. However, a freight
container can also be used in
accordance with § 173.427(c) and
should be subject to these requirements.
Any requirement to measure non-fixed
contamination on the internal surface of
a tank or IBC is addressed by our change
to the introductory language of
paragraph (a).
• Finally, Mr. Laude inquired
whether paragraph (a)(2) should apply
to overpacks as well as conveyances.
While this seems possible, we consider
this change unnecessary because we are
addressing the misconception that
conveyances used for non-exclusive use
transport were required to be routinely
surveyed for contamination.
Paragraph (b)
Section 173.443(b) currently allows
non-fixed radioactive contamination
limits on a package to be up to ten times
the limits in § 173.443(a) during
exclusive use shipments by rail or
highway, if the initial contamination is
no greater than the § 173.443(a) limits.
We proposed to apply this exception to
the external and internal surfaces of
conveyances, overpacks, freight
containers, tanks, and IBCs, in addition
to the external surfaces of each package.
This ensures that any radioactive
substances on the associated items
utilized during transportation do not
exceed the designated upper limits for
non-fixed (removable) radioactive
contamination of the package during
transport.
In response to comments from
Lawrence Laude and Regulatory
E:\FR\FM\11JYR3.SGM
11JYR3
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 133 / Friday, July 11, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Resources, we are removing the
reference to the ‘‘internal surfaces’’ of
tanks and IBCs from the proposed
§ 173.443(b) because they are covered by
the term ‘‘package.’’ However, we
disagree that the reference to tanks and
IBCs should be removed from the
‘‘return to service’’ provisions in
§ 173.443(c), which should be
applicable to tanks and IBCs. And we do
not find any inconsistency with the
provisions in § 173.428 on the transport
of empty Class 7 (radioactive)
packagings.
Paragraph (c)
In paragraph (c), we proposed to
replace the phrase ‘‘returned to service
until the radiation dose at each
accessible surface’’ is at a specified level
with ‘‘returned to Class 7 (radioactive)
materials exclusive use transport
service, and then only for a subsequent
exclusive use shipment utilizing one of
the above cited provisions, unless the
radiation dose rate at each accessible
surface’’ is at that specified level. Under
this proposal, with limited exceptions
provided by §§ 173.443(a) and (d), a
conveyance, freight container, overpack,
tank, or intermediate bulk container
used for exclusive use transport of
radioactive materials under
§§ 173.427(b)(4), 173.427(c), or
173.443(b) would need to be surveyed
with appropriate radiation detection
instruments. These conveyances, freight
containers, overpacks, tanks, or
intermediate bulk containers would
have to exhibit a radiation dose rate no
greater than 0.005 mSv per hour (0.5
mrem per hour) at any accessible
surface, and non-fixed radioactive
surface contamination no greater than
the limits in § 173.443(a), in order to
continue to be used for one of the
following specified Class 7 (radioactive)
materials exclusive use transport
scenarios:
(1) The use of the packaging exception
for less than an A2 quantity authorized
in § 173.427(b)(4);
(2) The use of the authorization in
§ 173.427(c) to ship unpackaged LSA–I
and SCO–I; or
(3) The use of the authorization in
§ 173.443(b) to ship packages that may
develop increased contamination during
transport up to ten times the normal
package limits, so long as the package
meets the non-fixed contamination
limits at the beginning of transport.
The procedure described in
§ 173.443(c) would not be applicable,
and would in fact generally be
prohibited, for unrestricted return to
general service of the item or
conveyance. The rationale for this
proposed change in §§ 173.443(c),
VerDate Mar<15>2010
00:08 Jul 11, 2014
Jkt 232001
174.715(a), 175.705(c), 176.715, and
177.843(a), is as follows:
(1) If this ‘‘returned to service’’
criterion were to be considered a
criterion for unrestricted release
following exclusive use transport of
Class 7 (radioactive) materials, it would
be providing a radioactive material
unrestricted transfer (free release) limit,
which DOT cannot authorize. DOT has
authority only for the regulation of
radioactive material while in transport.
The clearance (unrestricted or free
release) from regulatory control of
radioactive materials for further use or
disposal, or ownership, is subject to
regulations of the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, NRC Agreement States or
is effected pursuant to the control of the
Department of Energy from their
facilities (pursuant to the Atomic Energy
Act of 1954, as Amended and the
Energy Reorganization Act of 1974;
(2) Non-hazardous material, even
foodstuffs, could be transported in
contact with these items or
conveyances, and an unacceptable
health physics practice would result if
these limits were construed to be a
criterion for free release (i.e., for
unrestricted radioactive material
transfer);
(3) Adhering to the requirements for
non-fixed contamination (no greater
than the § 173.443(a) values) and
radiation level (no greater than 0.005
mSv per hour, or 0.5 mrem per hour, at
the surface of the vehicle) of
§ 173.443(c) would not provide
sufficient protection for unrestricted
transfer, considering that over time
factors such as weathering could
gradually convert any fixed
contamination to non-fixed
contamination; and
(4) Allowing the free release or
unrestricted transfer of radioactive
material at these levels would be
incompatible with currently and
generally accepted radiation protection
practices.
USACE stated that the proposed
rulemaking does not eliminate the
confusion about ‘‘contamination,’’
especially for internal surfaces of
conveyances, tanks, or intermediate
bulk containers and whether they can be
released from non-radioactive
shipments. It also noted there are
discrepancies concerning ‘‘unrestricted
release’’ between PHMSA (in the HMR)
and other Federal government agencies
(in various guidance documents) and
recommended that we consult with the
NRC to develop ‘‘unrestricted release’’
criteria that would be applicable to both
transport and transfer. While such a
project may have merit, it would be
beyond the scope of this rulemaking and
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40601
could involve attempts to reconcile noninternationally accepted standards and/
or U.S. standards that may be less
restrictive or decades old. In this
rulemaking, we are adopting the most
recent international standards on
contamination promulgated by the
United Nations and the IAEA to be as
consistent as possible with transport
safety standards required by the rest of
the countries in the world and facilitate
international commerce.
Energy Solutions commented that the
‘‘return to service’’ provisions in revised
paragraph (c) would create ambiguities,
are contrary to the intent of the 1979
DOT and NRC memorandum of
understanding, and are not compliant
with Presidential Executive Orders
12866 and 13272, the Paperwork
Reduction Act, the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act and ALARA mandates. The
questions that Energy Solutions
presented and our responses are as
follows:
• Would a manifest be required when
the package, conveyance, overpack,
freight container, tank, or intermediate
bulk container meets the return to
service criteria, under the revised
language? Since the exclusive use
provision would continue to apply, at a
minimum, the exclusive use
requirements in § 173.403 would be
applicable. The shipper must also
classify and offer the material
appropriate to the hazard, as applicable.
• What is the proper shipping name
if the remaining material is exempt from
Class 7 transport in accordance with
§ 173.436? If the remaining material can
be demonstrated to be exempt from the
regulations, then the HMR do not apply
and therefore a proper shipping name is
not necessary.
• How would the return to service
requirements apply to various
hypothetical situations, such as:
Æ If a reportable quantity of
radioactive material is being offered that
is also exempt from the HMR in
accordance with § 173.436. We do not
know of a realistic scenario that could
cause this situation to happen, but if the
radioactive material can be
demonstrated to be exempt from the
HMR, then the HMR do not apply.
Æ If the radioactive Class 7 hazard
present is the subsidiary hazard of the
material. We see no ambiguity; the
return to service requirements criteria
apply whether the radioactive material
is the primary or subsidiary hazard.
Æ If the conveyance returned to
service under the proposed language
remains under the control of the
licensee or if it must be returned to a
licensed facility? The material will need
to be transferred in accordance with the
E:\FR\FM\11JYR3.SGM
11JYR3
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
40602
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 133 / Friday, July 11, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
transfer license conditions of the
shipper, which the DOT does not
regulate.
Æ If a closed transport vehicle meets
the criteria in § 173.443(d) and is
marked and placarded, would a
manifest would be required and what
proper shipping name should be used?
The return to service requirements in
paragraph (c) do not apply to a vehicle
that meets the conditions in paragraph
(d).
Overall, we disagree with Energy
Solutions’ position that the proposed
rulemaking does not provide the
clarification DOT seeks. We believe the
proposed rulemaking clarifies possible
longstanding misinterpretations on the
distinction between transport and
transfer of radioactive material and that
the benefits realized for the public,
transport workers and emergency
responders far outweigh any possible
disadvantages of the proposal.
We also disagree that this rulemaking
is inconsistent with the 1979
Memorandum of Understanding or that
it is not in ‘‘the public interest.’’ DOT
and the NRC have advised and
consulted with one another on this
subject for a number of years and
worked to clarify that return to service
does not refer to, and cannot be
interpreted to mean, unrestricted release
or transfer. Class 7 accidental release
statistics which the commenter referred
to in the comments are not applicable in
this case, because even if such accidents
were to have occurred and no hazard
communications were available, there
would be no way of knowing such data
should even be gathered because the
human senses cannot detect radiation.
Additionally, the possible detrimental
scenarios need not be accident related,
even weathering effects could possibly
cause the spread of contamination, or as
stated in the proposed rulemaking the
contamination could be commingled
with foodstuffs in subsequent
transports, creating an unsatisfactory
health physics practice.
Based on currently-accepted health
physics theory, these revisions provide
benefits to the public. Any data or
documentation would be unrevealing,
as there would be no deterministic
health effects observed from low level
contamination and any stochastic health
effects would be equally difficult to
observe empirically.
Similarly, we do not agree with
Energy Solutions’ arguments that this
rulemaking fails to comply with the
Executive Orders 12866 and 13271, the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, and
the Paperwork Reduction Act on the
theory that the amendments proposed in
the NPRM would result in a dramatic
VerDate Mar<15>2010
22:43 Jul 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
increase in operational costs of
approximately 800–1,000% without any
offsetting benefit or reduction in
exposure to the public. Energy Solutions
was the only entity to assert that there
would be any increase in costs, much
less the extreme increase it claimed. We
consider that some relatively minor
adaptation to new practices would
enable return shipments of packages
classified under a relatively lower Class
7 hazard category, such as an excepted
package, and the regulatory benefits of
modest transport requirements
(primarily hazard communication
provided to transport workers,
emergency responders and members of
the public) far outweigh the burden
imposed.
Lastly, Energy Solutions
recommended creating a new definition
in § 173.403 for the term ‘‘release survey
effective radiation dose equivalent’’ and
additional rewording of § 173.443, as
proposed in the NPRM, to provide
‘‘relief from the unnecessary burdens
and inaccuracies’’ of the proposal.
However, these recommended changes
are beyond the scope of the proposals in
this rulemaking.
Regulatory Resources expressed
uncertainty over what the intention was
for the proposed § 173.443(c) ‘‘return to
service’’ criteria, but seemed to believe
it applied primarily to packages. Our
intention is unchanged, and we believe
it is widely recognized that the basic
contamination limits provided in
§ 173.443 will not typically lead to cross
contamination of conveyances or any
other items in contact with packaged
radioactive material. For this reason, we
do not require periodic radiation and
contamination surveys related to nonexclusive use transport.
At the same time, we are clarifying
the return to service criteria in this
rulemaking, because regulatory relief in
certain circumstances, such as provided
by §§ 173.443(b), 173.427(b)(4), or
173.427(c), can possibly create cross
contamination. For this reason,
exclusive use provisions are needed,
and return to service surveys are
necessary, in order to mitigate and
control the build-up of contamination
levels in undesired locations when
these provisions are utilized, while
allowing flexibility and overall exposure
reduction in these instances. As noted
above, there seems to be some confusion
that return to service standards can lead
to a free release or unrestricted transfer
situation, for which DOT does not have
authority. Rather, exclusive use
provisions may always be terminated
when the items affected have been
demonstrated to be no longer subject to
the HMR or can be transported in
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
accordance with provisions of the HMR
that do not require contamination
related exclusive use transport.
Paragraph (d)
In paragraph (d), we proposed to
require placarding of closed transport
vehicles used solely for the exclusive
transportation by highway or rail of
Class 7 (radioactive) material packages
with contamination levels that do not
exceed 10 times the package
contamination limits prescribed in
§ 173.443(a). We proposed to add the
qualifier ‘‘exclusive use’’ to ensure that
the exclusive use requirements
described under the definition of
‘‘exclusive use’’ in § 173.403 are
satisfied for these shipments. In this
paragraph, we are deleting the word
‘‘packages’’ to allow this paragraph to
apply to unpackaged radioactive
material, which will provide
consistency with similar requirements
found in paragraphs §§ 174.715(b) and
177.843(b).
Lawrence Laude suggested that
§ 173.443(d)(2) be changed to allow the
words to be a ‘‘marked’’ rather than
‘‘stenciled’’ to allow flexibility. PHMSA
accepts that there are several ways to
appropriately mark the required
information, and has amended the
regulatory text to allow marking, with
stenciling as an example.
Paragraph (e)
In paragraph (e), we proposed to add
required actions for leaking or suspect
Class 7 (radioactive) packages or
unpackaged material, including
immediate actions and assessments,
protective requirements, recovery
techniques, and prerequisites for
continued transport. In response to the
suggestions from Regulatory Resources,
we are adding the words ‘‘as applicable’’
and changing the second sentence in the
paragraph to read ‘‘The scope of the
assessment must include, as applicable,
the package, the conveyance, the
adjacent loading and unloading areas,
and, if necessary, all other material
which has been carried in the
conveyance.’’
Section 173.453
This section prescribes exceptions for
fissile materials. In the NPRM we
proposed inserting a phrase into
§ 173.453(d) that would allow a fissile
material exception for uranium enriched
in uranium-235 to a maximum of 1
percent by weight under the conditions
stated there only if the material in
question is essentially homogeneous.
After consulting with the NRC on its
upcoming rulemaking, we have decided
to not make the proposed change at this
E:\FR\FM\11JYR3.SGM
11JYR3
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 133 / Friday, July 11, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
time. If the NRC changes the defining
criteria for this radionuclide we will
update in a future rulemaking.
Regulatory Resources suggested a
reorganization of § 173.453(c) for clarity.
However, this was not included in our
NPRM and we find the existing
language to be clear, so we are not
adopting the suggested changes.
Section 173.465
This section sets out requirements for
Type A packaging tests. In paragraph
(a), we are adding a specific reference to
the standard in § 173.412(j) for when a
test for a Type A package is deemed to
be successful. In § 173.465(d)(i), we are
adopting the revised TS–R–1 language
to clarify that the stacking test weight
must be calculated using five times the
maximum weight of the loaded package.
USEC suggested that we reword this
requirement to ‘‘maximum allowable
package weight,’’ but we choose to keep
the wording shown in our NPRM for
consistency with TS–R–1.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Section 173.466
This section describes additional tests
for Type A packagings designed for
liquids and gases. In paragraph (a), we
are adding a specific reference to the
standard in § 173.412(k) for when a test
for a Type A package designed for
liquids or gases is deemed to be
successful.
Section 173.469
This section describes tests for special
form Class 7 (radioactive) materials. In
paragraph (b)(2)(ii), we are replacing the
word ‘‘edges’’ with the word ‘‘edge’’
since this refers to the edge of a flat
circular surface.
In paragraph (b)(2)(iii), we are
revising the units of measure and the
thickness requirement for the lead sheet
used for the percussion test from ‘‘2.5
cm (1 inch) or greater’’ to ‘‘not more
than 25 mm (1 inch)’’ in thickness,
which is consistent with the
requirement in TS–R–1. USEC asked
that there be a transition period for
previously tested materials that might
not meet the revised criteria. PHMSA
expects minimal impact because
alternative testing in accordance with
ISO 2919 or IAEA requirements has
been typically used to demonstrate
compliance. If any special form
certificate renewals are impacted, they
will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis
to allow for transition if necessary.
In paragraph (d)(1) we are adding an
alternative to allow the use of the ISO
2919 Class 5 impact test as an
alternative to the impact and percussion
test if the mass of the special form
material is less than 500 g, as this
VerDate Mar<15>2010
22:43 Jul 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
alternative was added to TS–R–1.
Updated references to the 1999 edition
of ISO 2919 are being added to
paragraphs (d)(1) and (d)(2).
We are adding a provision in new
paragraph (e) in § 173.469 to allow
sources subjected to the ISO 2919 heat
test before the effective date of this final
rule to not have to be retested to the
newer revision of ISO 2919 (i.e. ISO
2919–1999(E)) which is being
incorporated by reference in this
rulemaking.
Section 173.473
This section prescribes requirements
for foreign made packages. We are
revising § 173.473(a)(1) to update the
reference to the 2009 edition of the
IAEA standards for transportation of
radioactive materials, TS–R–1.
Section 173.476
This section details the requirements
for approval of special form materials.
We are revising paragraph (a) to extend
the retention period for special form
documentation from one year to two
years after the offeror’s latest shipment,
to coincide with the minimum retention
period for shipping papers. In the
NPRM we proposed revising paragraph
(d) to replace the reference to an
obsolete proper shipping name with a
reference to the current proper shipping
names. This change was completed
under a different rulemaking, Docket
No. PHMSA–2013–0158 (HM–244F) 78
FR 60748 (Oct. 2, 2013). Further
amendment to this paragraph is not
needed in this final rule.
Lawrence Laude requested that
paragraph (d) be expanded to include
packages of special form material where
the activity is less than A2 to account for
special form sources with expired or
unavailable documentation which could
be shipped as ‘‘Radioactive Material,
Type A Package.’’ As discussed under
our changes to § 172.203(d)(2), if such
documentation does not exist, the
shipper should not classify the material
as special form and then this paragraph
would not be applicable.
Section 173.477
This section details the requirements
for approval of packagings containing
greater than 0.1 kg of non-fissile or
fissile-excepted uranium hexafluoride.
In paragraph (a), we are extending the
retention period for uranium
hexafluoride packaging documentation
from one year to two years after the
offeror’s latest shipment, to coincide
with the minimum retention period for
shipping papers.
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40603
Section 174.700
We are removing and reserving
paragraph (e), which provided special
handling requirements for fissile
material, controlled shipments, since
that term was removed from the
regulations in our January 26, 2004
rulemaking (69 FR 3632 (HM–230)).
Lawrence Laude stated that paragraph
(e) should not be deleted, but should be
reworded to be consistent with, for
example, § 177.842(f) as ‘‘fissile material
controlled shipments’’ were replaced
with exclusive use shipments with a
total CSI not to exceed 100. The
commenter also stated that if this
change is intended to rely on the
references to §§ 173.457 and 173.459 in
§ 174.700(d), the requirements in part
177 should be similar and the different
modal requirements should be
consistent. However, paragraph (d) does
provide references to §§ 173.457 and
173.459, as does § 177.842(f). The
commenter also proposed deletion of
§ 173.459, but as we did not include any
proposed changes to that section in the
NPRM we are not adopting that
suggestion.
Section 174.715
This section prescribes requirements
for cleanliness of rail transport vehicles
after use. We are revising § 174.715(a) to
make this section consistent with the
changes being made in § 173.443(c) to
clarify the phrase ‘‘returned to service.’’
Section 175.702
This section provides separation
distance requirements for packages
containing Class 7 (radioactive)
materials in cargo aircraft. In the NPRM
we proposed changes to § 175.702(b)
and (c) to include references to the CSI
limits in § 175.700(b). Lawrence Laude
noted that this paragraph is inconsistent
with TS–R–1, which does not have
limits on groups of packages beyond the
limits for the entire aircraft. We agree
that this paragraph is more stringent
than TS–R–1, but not otherwise
contradictory. In other words,
compliance with the existing
requirements of § 175.702(b) satisfies
the (lesser) requirements in TS–R–1. As
such, we are adopting the changes to
§ 175.702 as proposed in the NPRM.
Section 175.705
This section describes requirements
concerning radioactive contamination of
aircraft. In paragraph (c) we are
clarifying that the totality of any
radioactive substances remaining after
clean-up of an aircraft where radioactive
material has been released must not
meet the definition of radioactive
material (as defined in § 173.403) before
E:\FR\FM\11JYR3.SGM
11JYR3
40604
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 133 / Friday, July 11, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
returning the aircraft to service.
Lawrence Laude noted the proposed
change to § 175.705 appears to be more
stringent than the requirement for other
modes as well as the non-fixed
contamination limits in § 173.443(a).
The commenter is correct in noting the
contamination related requirements for
aircraft are different from the other
modes. The differences are a result of
the evolution of the requirements,
dating back to aircraft contamination
events that occurred in the 1960s.
However, it should be noted that the
contamination limits in § 173.443 apply
to packages, conveyances and other
related items that are offered for Class
7 transport. It should also be noted that
§ 173.443(a) does not just require
compliance with the Table 9 limits, but
also that contamination be kept as low
as reasonably achievable.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Section 176.715
This section describes requirements
concerning radioactive contamination of
vessels. We are revising § 176.715 to
make this section consistent with the
changes being made in § 173.443(c) to
clarify when holds, compartments, or
deck areas used for the transportation of
LSA material or SCO under exclusive
use conditions may be ‘‘used again’’ (i.e.
‘‘returned to service’’). Lawrence Laude
stated these changes to § 176.715 would
add increased ambiguity rather than
eliminating it because it does not
specifically address contamination
limits for holds, compartments, and
deck areas being returned to general
service. The commenter also stated it
was questionable whether a deck area
would be used for unpackaged
radioactive material. We believe the
definition of contamination in
conjunction with the new scope
exclusion provided in § 173.401(b)(5)
provides clear guidance as to when the
HMR is applicable in these transport
cases cited by the commenter, as well as
all other transport scenarios. However,
any further transfer or ownership
criteria of radioactive material will be
regulated separately by the applicable
licensing authority. Use of a deck area
for unpackaged transport is conceivable
in accordance with § 173.427(c), so it is
not appropriate to revise this wording.
Section 177.843
This section describes requirements
concerning radioactive contamination of
vehicles. In § 177.843(a), PHMSA is
adding a reference to § 173.443(b). This
is part of a larger proposed change
developed from PHMSA internal
review, that is intended to make this
section consistent with the changes
proposed in § 173.443(c). In this final
VerDate Mar<15>2010
22:43 Jul 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
rule, PHMSA is modifying § 173.443(c),
to eliminate the ambiguity and
confusion concerning the phrase
‘‘returned to service,’’ for conveyances,
overpacks, freight containers, tanks, and
intermediate bulk containers that may
have had radioactive substances
deposited on them during certain Class
7 (radioactive) exclusive use transport
scenarios.
Lawrence Laude suggested that
§ 177.843 fails to address the
contamination limits to be applied to
motor vehicles being returned to general
service. We believe the definition of
contamination in conjunction with the
new scope of exclusions provided in
§ 173.401(b)(5) will provide clear
guidance as to when the HMR is
applicable in these transport cases cited
by the commenter, as well as all other
possible transport scenarios. However,
any further transfer or ownership
criteria of radioactive material will be
regulated separately by the applicable
licensing agency.
Lawrence Laude further stated the
current and proposed § 177.843(a)
requires that motor vehicles used for an
exclusive use shipment of LSA material
or SCO per § 173.427(b)(4) must be
surveyed for contamination after each
use. The commenter also noted
§ 173.427(b)(4) allows LSA material and
SCO to be shipped in packages meeting
the performance based criteria of
§ 173.410 and these are the same criteria
that Type IP–1 packages have to meet,
yet exclusive use shipments of LSA
material and SCO in Type IP–1 packages
do not require vehicle surveys after use.
For consistency, the commenter
recommended that the requirement for
surveying vehicles used for
§ 173.427(b)(4) shipments be deleted
from § 177.843(a) and the corresponding
sections of Parts 174 and 176. We
believe the commenter failed to note the
longstanding domestic exception in
§ 173.427(b)(4) permits liquid LSA–I,
LSA–II, LSA–III and SCO–II to be
transported in a Type IP–1 package,
under certain conditions, rather than a
Type IP–2 or Type IP–3 as required by
Table 6 in § 173.427. This practice has
been demonstrated to provide needed
flexibility and an effective level of safety
for several decades. A shipper is not
required to package in accordance with
§ 173.427(b)(4) and may elect to ship
solid LSA–I and SCO–I in a Type IP–1
non-exclusive use in accordance with
§ 173.427(b)(1) and Table 6 in § 173.427.
A shipper may also elect to package in
accordance with §§ 173.427(b)(2), (3), or
(5), which would not necessarily require
the survey required by § 177.843(a).
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Section 178.350
This section provides specifications
for specification 7A packages. We are
revising paragraph (c) to clarify that a
DOT Specification 7A Type A package
must satisfy the requirements of § 178.2
as well as the marking requirements of
§ 178.3.
Sections 178.356, 176.356–1
through178.356–5
These sections provide specifications
for specification 20PF phenolic-foam
insulated, metal overpacks. USEC noted
that this section, along with the sections
cited below on the 21PF overpacks,
should also be deleted in its entirety, as
the 20PF series overpacks are old
specification packages that also are no
longer in service. We agree, and are
removing and reserving these sections.
Sections 178.358, 178.358–1 through
178.358–6
These sections provide specifications
for specification 21PF fire and shock
resistant, phenolic-foam insulated,
metal overpacks. We are removing
§§ 178.358 and 178.358–1 through
178.358–6 because 21PF overpacks for
uranium hexafluoride cylinders are no
longer authorized.
Sections 178.360, 178.360–1 through
178.360–4
These sections provide specifications
for specification 2R: Inside containment
vessels. We are removing §§ 178.360,
and 178.360–1 through 178.360–4
pertaining to the DOT Specification 2R
inside containment vessel since
specification 2R was only required,
under certain conditions, to be used as
the inner container for the DOT
Specification 20WC, 21WC, 6L, and 6M
packages, and authorization for use of
these latter packages was terminated on
October 1, 2008. J. L. Shepherd was
concerned that removal of the 2R
specification would impact Special
Permits that include their usage;
however, this change would not directly
affect such Special Permits.
IV. Regulatory Analyses and Notices
A. Statutory/Legal Authority for This
Rulemaking
This final rule is published under
authority of 49 U.S.C. 5103 and 5120
which, respectively:
1. Authorize the Secretary of
Transportation to (a) designate
radioactive and other materials ‘‘as
hazardous when the Secretary
determines that transporting the
material in commerce in a particular
amount and form may pose an
unreasonable risk to health and safety or
E:\FR\FM\11JYR3.SGM
11JYR3
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 133 / Friday, July 11, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
property,’’ and (b) ‘‘prescribe
regulations for the safe transportation,
including security, of hazardous
material in intrastate, interstate, and
foreign commerce.’’
2. Direct the Secretary to (a)
‘‘participate in international forums that
establish or recommend mandatory
standards and requirements for
transporting hazardous material in
international commerce,’’ and (b)
‘‘consult with interested authorities to
ensure that, to the extent practicable,
regulations the Secretary prescribes . . .
are consistent with standards and
requirements related to transporting
hazardous material that international
authorities adopt,’’ except that the
Secretary need not adopt an
international standard or requirement
which ‘‘the Secretary decides. . .is
unnecessary or unsafe,’’ and the
Secretary may prescribe a more
stringent safety standard or requirement
which the Secretary decides ‘‘is
necessary in the public interest.’’ This
final rule amends requirements in the
HMR governing the transportation of
Class 7 (radioactive) materials in
commerce to maintain alignment with
international standards by adopting
recent updates in TS–R–1, including
changes to packaging requirements,
definitions, and activity limits.
Harmonization serves to facilitate
international commerce; at the same
time, harmonization promotes the safety
of people, property, and the
environment by reducing the potential
for confusion and misunderstanding
that could result if shippers and
transporters were required to comply
with two or more conflicting sets of
regulatory requirements. While the
intent of this rulemaking is to align the
HMR with international standards, we
review and consider each amendment
on its own merit based on its overall
impact on transportation safety and the
economic implications associated with
its adoption into the HMR. Our goal is
to harmonize without sacrificing the
current HMR level of safety and without
imposing undue burdens on the
regulated community. Thus, as
explained in the corresponding sections
above, we are not harmonizing with
certain specific provisions of the TS–R–
1. Moreover, we are maintaining a
number of current exceptions for
domestic transportation that should
minimize the compliance burden on the
regulated community.
In developing this final rule PHMSA
consulted with the NRC and the U.S.
Coast Guard.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
22:43 Jul 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
B. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
and DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures
This rulemaking is not considered a
significant regulatory action under
Executive Order (E.O.) 12866
(‘‘Regulatory Planning and Review’’), as
supplemented and reaffirmed by E.O.
13563 (‘‘Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review’’), stressing that, to
the extent permitted by law, an agency
rulemaking action must be based on
benefits that justify its costs, impose the
least burden, consider cumulative
burdens, maximize benefits, use
performance objectives, and assess
available alternatives, and the
Regulatory Policies and Procedures of
the Department of Transportation (44 FR
11034).
During the rulemaking process,
PHMSA considered three alternatives to
harmonize domestic and international
radioactive materials transportation
requirements:
Alternative 1: Do nothing. The United
States actively participates in the
development of uniform international
standards for transporting hazardous
materials. Because all major countries
and international carrier organizations
have or will adopt the changes proposed
in this rulemaking, a do-nothing
approach would fail to adopt
international standards which enhance
safety in the transportation of
radioactive materials and would result
in complications in the movement of
these materials. Future inconsistencies
with international transport standards
may result in foreign authorities
refusing to accept hazardous material
shipments prepared in accordance with
the HMR. To successfully participate in
international markets, U.S. companies
would be required to conform to dual
regulations. Inconsistent domestic and
international regulations also have an
adverse safety impact by making it more
difficult for shippers and carriers to
understand and comply with all
applicable requirements. Unnecessary
transportation delays may also expose
international shipments to additional
safety and security vulnerabilities. For
these reasons, PHMSA did not adopt
Alternative 1.
Alternative 2: Adopt the international
standards in their entirety. Under this
alternative, all revisions to the IAEA
regulations would be incorporated into
the HMR. In some instances PHMSA
believes more stringent regulations are
necessary to enhance transportation
safety, and in others, less stringent
regulations are necessary to reduce
economic burden. Because of certain
safety and economic concerns PHMSA
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40605
elected not to propose adoption into the
HMR of some amendments incorporated
into the IAEA regulations. In addition,
PHMSA and the NRC have identified
changes that are only applicable
domestically that would increase safety,
reduce costs, and improve compliance.
For these reasons, PHMSA did not
adopt Alternative 2.
Alternative 3: Adopt IAEA regulations
with additional changes to the HMR that
promise to enhance safety and decrease
regulatory compliance obstacles. Under
this alternative, PHMSA is harmonizing
the HMR with the IAEA regulations and
the NRC proposed amendments to an
extent consistent with U.S. safety and
economic goals. As indicated above,
PHMSA is not adopting provisions that,
in PHMSA’s view, do not provide an
adequate level of safety. Further,
PHMSA is providing for exceptions and
extended compliance periods to
minimize the potential economic impact
of any revisions on the regulated
community. PHMSA provides detailed
justification for each instance in the
final rule where the proposed change
differs from the revised IAEA
regulations. Alternative 3 is the only
alternative that addresses, in all
respects, the purpose of this regulatory
action, which is to facilitate the safe and
efficient transportation of hazardous
materials in international commerce.
For these reasons, Alternative 3 is
PHMSA’s chosen alternative. A
complete copy of the economic impact
assessment for this final rule is available
in the docket for this rulemaking action
PHMSA–2009–0063 (HM–250).
C. Executive Order 13132
This final rule has been analyzed in
accordance with the principles and
criteria contained in Executive Order
13132 (‘‘Federalism’’). This final rule
preempts State, local, and Indian tribe
requirements but does not impose any
regulation that has substantial direct
effects on the States, the relationship
between the national government and
the States, or the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various
levels of government. Therefore, the
consultation and funding requirements
of Executive Order 13132 do not apply.
The Federal hazardous material
transportation law, 49 U.S.C. 5101–
5128, contains an express preemption
provision (49 U.S.C. 5125(b)) that
preempts State, local, and Indian tribe
requirements on certain subjects, as
follows:
(1) The designation, description, and
classification of hazardous material;
(2) The packing, repacking, handling,
labeling, marking, and placarding of
hazardous material;
E:\FR\FM\11JYR3.SGM
11JYR3
40606
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 133 / Friday, July 11, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
(3) The preparation, execution, and
use of shipping documents related to
hazardous material and requirements
related to the number, contents, and
placement of those documents;
(4) The written notification,
recording, and reporting of the
unintentional release in transportation
of hazardous material; and
(5) The design, manufacture,
fabrication, inspection, marking,
maintenance, recondition, repair, or
testing of a packaging or container
represented, marked, certified, or sold
as qualified for use in transporting
hazardous material in commerce.
This final rule addresses subject items
(1), (2), (3), and (5) above and preempts
State, local, and Indian tribe
requirements not meeting the
‘‘substantively the same’’ standard.
Federal hazardous materials
transportation law provides at 49 U.S.C.
5125(b)(2) that, if DOT issues a
regulation concerning any of the
covered subjects, DOT must determine
and publish in the Federal Register the
effective date of Federal preemption.
The effective date may not be earlier
than the 90th day following the date of
issuance of the final rule and not later
than two years after the date of issuance.
The effective date of Federal preemption
is January 1, 2015.
D. Executive Order 13175
This final rule was analyzed in
accordance with the principles and
criteria contained in Executive Order
13175 (‘‘Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments’’).
PHMSA received two comments
concerning Executive Order 13175.
PHMSA received a comment from NIRS
and CACC asking how we concluded
that the proposed rule would not
uniquely impact communities of Indian
Tribal leadership. PHMSA also received
a comment from the Alaska Inter-Tribal
Council stating its opposition to the
assertion that our proposed rule does
not significantly or uniquely affect the
communities of the Indian Tribal
governments. The Alaska Inter-Tribal
Council states that international
shipping of radioactive materials is of
great concern because of the potential
adverse risks to the Arctic territory and
its inhabitants. It further states that
consultation between tribal
governments and PHMSA must occur
before any changes to PHMSA rules that
could potentially adversely impact
tribal communities, territories, peoples
and traditional ways of life.
This rule has the intended goal of
harmonizing with international
standards for the safe transportation of
radioactive materials, making internally
VerDate Mar<15>2010
22:43 Jul 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
identified clarifications of requirements,
and making changes that enhance safety
while shipments of radioactive
materials are in transportation.
International and domestic shipments of
radioactive materials are already
transiting arctic waters and Alaska in
compliance with the requirements of
TS–R–1 or the HMR. The changes
adopted in this final rule are simply
creating greater harmonization with the
international standard, and are not
creating or authorizing new hazardous
materials shipments or transit routes.
Furthermore, consistency between U.S.
and international regulations enhances
the safety of international hazardous
materials transportation through better
understanding of the regulations, an
increased level of industry compliance,
the smooth flow of hazardous materials
from their points of origin to their
points of destination, and consistent
emergency response in the event of a
hazardous materials incident. Based on
this information and the absence of
specific indications to the contrary from
these commenters, the revisions
adopted in this final rule do not have
direct tribal implications and do not
impose substantial direct compliance
costs on Indian tribal governments;
consequently 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 and has been
developed in accordance with Executive
Order 13272 (‘‘Proper Consideration of
Small Entities in Agency Rulemaking’’)
and DOT’s procedures and policies to
promote compliance with the
Regulatory Flexibility Act to ensure that
potential impacts of draft rules on small
entities are properly considered.
This final rule facilitates the
transportation of hazardous materials in
international commerce by providing
consistency with international
standards. This final rule applies to
offerors and carriers of hazardous
materials, some of whom are small
entities, such as chemical
manufacturers, users and suppliers,
packaging manufacturers, distributors,
and training companies. As discussed in
the regulatory impact analysis, the
majority of amendments in this final
rule should result in cost savings and
ease the regulatory compliance burden
for shippers engaged in domestic and
international commerce, including
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
trans-border shipments within North
America.
Many companies will realize
economic benefits as a result of these
amendments. Additionally, the changes
effected by this final rule will relieve
U.S. companies, including small entities
competing in foreign markets, from the
burden of complying with a dual system
of regulations. Therefore, we certify that
these amendments will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. A
complete copy of the regulatory
flexibility analysis for this final rule is
available in the docket for this
rulemaking action.
F. Paperwork Reduction Act
PHMSA currently has approved
information collections under Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) Control
Number 2137–0034, ‘‘Hazardous
Materials Shipping Papers and
Emergency Response Information,’’ and
OMB Control Number 2137–0510,
‘‘Radioactive Materials Transportation
Requirements.’’ Specifically, this final
rule will result in:
• A decrease in the annual
information collection burden of OMB
Control Number 2137–0034 due to
reductions in the shipping paper
requirements for excepted quantities of
RAM shipments. These reductions in
burden include not requiring the mass
of these shipments on the shipping
papers for air shipments in
§ 172.202(a)(6), the additional
description in § 172.203(d) for RAM
shipments, and not requiring the
shippers certification statement for
RAM shipments in § 172.204(c)(4) and
• an increase in the annual
information collection burden of OMB
Control Number 2137–0510 due to an
increase in the duration of record
keeping requirements in §§ 173.411(c)
and 173.415(a), and the documentation
required to demonstrate a package
complies with testing requirements in
§§ 173.415(a)(1) and (a)(2).
In response to comments received
from multiple commenters we are
authorizing an option for alternative
documentation to allow an offeror who
receives a packaging from another party
acting as the manufacturer, to rely on a
manufacturer’s certification when
available. In such instances, the offeror
must maintain a copy of the
manufacturer’s certification and, if
requested by DOT, be able to obtain a
copy of the complete documentation
from the manufacturer. These changes
will not result in an increase of
respondents or responses, as the new
requirements are in addition to existing
package documentation requirements.
E:\FR\FM\11JYR3.SGM
11JYR3
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 133 / Friday, July 11, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
There will however be additional costs
involved in the preparation and
retention of the documents in question.
The manufacturer’s certification is an
additional document, not previously
provided for in the HMR, but is merely
an optional alternative to the existing
package documentation requirements.
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995, no person is required to
respond to an information collection
unless it has been approved by OMB
and displays a valid OMB control
number. Section 1320.8(d), title 5, Code
of Federal Regulations requires that
PHMSA provide interested members of
the public and affected agencies an
opportunity to comment on information
and recordkeeping requests.
This rule identifies revised
information collection requests that
PHMSA will submit to OMB for
approval based on the requirements in
this final rule. PHMSA has developed
burden estimates to reflect changes in
this final rule, and estimates the
information collection and
recordkeeping burden in this rule to be
as follows:
OMB Control Number 2137–0034
Annual Decrease in Number of
Respondents: 10,000.
Annual Decrease in Annual Number
of Responses: 100,000.
Annual Decrease in Annual Burden
Hours: 140.
Annual Decrease in Annual Burden
Costs: $5,912.
100,000 responses at 5 seconds a
response equals 140 hours at $42.23 an
hour.
OMB Control Number 2137–0510.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Annual Increase in Number of
Respondents: 0.
Annual Increase in Annual Number of
Responses: 500.
Annual Increase in Annual Burden
Hours: 6100.
Annual Increase in Annual Burden
Costs: $394,731.
1400 modifications to existing
responses at $64.71 an hour and four
hours per response and; 500 new
certifications at $64.71 an hour and one
hour per response.
PHMSA will submit the revised
information collection and
recordkeeping requirements to OMB for
approval.
G. Regulation Identifier Number (RIN)
A regulation identifier number (RIN)
is assigned to each regulatory action
listed in the Unified Agenda of Federal
Regulations. The Regulatory Information
Service Center generally publishes the
Unified Agenda in April and October of
VerDate Mar<15>2010
22:43 Jul 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
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
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, adjusted for
inflation, to either State, local, or tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or to the
private sector in any one year, and is the
least burdensome alternative that
achieves the objective of the rule.
I. Environmental Assessment
The National Environmental Policy
Act, 42 U.S.C. 4321–4375, requires that
Federal agencies analyze proposed
actions to determine whether the action
will have a significant impact on the
human environment. In accordance
with the Council on Environmental
Quality (CEQ) regulations, federal
agencies must conduct an
environmental review considering (1)
the need for the proposed action, (2)
alternatives to the proposed action, (3)
probable environmental impacts of the
proposed action and alternatives, and
(4) the agencies and persons consulted
during the consideration process. 40
CFR 1508.9(b).
1. Purpose and Need
PHMSA is amending requirements in
the HMR pertaining to the
transportation of Class 7 (radioactive)
materials to harmonize the HMR with
changes contained in the IAEA
publication, entitled ‘‘Regulations for
the Safe Transport of Radioactive
Material, 2009 Edition, IAEA Safety
Standards Series No. TS–R–1,’’ and
making other amendments based on
PHMSA’s own initiative. These
amendments update, clarify, or provide
relief from certain existing regulatory
requirements to promote safer
transportation practices, eliminate
unnecessary regulatory requirements,
facilitate international commerce, and
make these requirements easier to
understand.
2. Alternatives
In developing this rule, PHMSA
considered three alternatives:
1. Do nothing;
2. Adopt the international standards
in their entirety; or
3. Adopt IAEA regulations and DOT/
NRC based changes that enhance safety
and decrease regulatory compliance
obstacles.
Alternative 1:
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40607
Because our goal is to facilitate
uniformity, compliance, commerce and
safety in the transportation of hazardous
materials, we rejected this alternative.
Alternative 2:
By adopting the international
standards in their entirety, PHMSA
could potentially adopt provisions that,
in our view, do not provide an adequate
level of transportation safety and
environmental safety and protection.
Further, because we provide for
domestic exceptions and extended
compliance periods to minimize the
potential economic impact of any
revisions on the regulated community,
this alternative was also rejected.
Alternative 3 is PHMSA’s selected
alternative, because it is the only
alternative that addresses, in all
respects, the purpose of this regulatory
action to facilitate the safe and efficient
transportation of hazardous materials in
international commerce. Alternative 1
would not facilitate uniformity,
compliance, commerce and safety in the
transportation of hazardous materials.
Alternative 2 includes, in some
instances, less stringent regulations than
are necessary to enhance transportation
safety, and in other instances, more
stringent regulations which
unnecessarily increase economic
burdens. In addition, PHMSA and the
NRC have identified domestic-only
changes that would increase safety,
reduce costs, and improve compliance.
3. Analysis of Environmental Impacts
Hazardous materials are transported
by aircraft, vessel, rail, and highway.
The potential for environmental damage
or contamination exists when packages
of Class 7 (radioactive) material are
involved in accidents or en route
incidents resulting from cargo shifts,
valve failures, package failures, or
loading, unloading, or handling
problems. The ecosystems that could be
affected by a release include air, water,
soil, and ecological resources (for
example, wildlife habitats), as well as
human exposure. The adverse
environmental impacts associated with
releases of most hazardous materials are
short-term impacts that can be greatly
reduced or eliminated through prompt
clean-up of the accident scene. Most
Class 7 (radioactive) materials are not
transported in quantities sufficient to
cause significant, long-term
environmental damage if they are
released, and those that have the
potential to significantly impact human
life or the environment must meet strict
packaging and handling standards to
ensure that even under accident
conditions the hazardous material
E:\FR\FM\11JYR3.SGM
11JYR3
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
40608
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 133 / Friday, July 11, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
would not be released into the
environment.
The hazardous material regulatory
system is a risk management system that
is prevention-oriented and focused on
identifying a hazard and reducing the
probability and quantity of a hazardous
material release. Making the regulatory
provisions in the HMR clearer and more
consistent with international standards
will promote compliance and facilitate
efficient transportation, thereby
enhancing the safe transportation of
hazardous materials and the protection
of the environment. Relaxing certain
regulatory requirements is based on
PHMSA’s experience, review, and
conclusion that the changes are safe.
PHMSA certifies that the amendments
proposed in this final rule will not have
a significant impact on the environment.
In this final rule PHMSA is adopting the
following noteworthy amendments to
the HMR:
Placarding of conveyances.
In this final rule PHMSA is requiring
placards to be affixed to conveyances
carrying fissile material packages,
unpackaged low specific activity (LSA)
material or surface contaminated objects
(SCO) in category I (i.e., LSA–I and
SCO–I respectively), all conveyances
required by §§ 173.427 and 173.441 to
operate under exclusive use conditions,
and all closed vehicles used in
accordance with § 173.443(d). PHMSA
expects a modest positive
environmental impact due to awareness
provided to transport personnel that
shipments contain modest amounts of
radioactivity, as well as a slight
reduction in exposure to transportation
personnel. The modest gains would not
be achieved under alternative one or
two.
Extension of package documentation
retention requirement and clarification
of information required to be
maintained.
New clarification on types of
information required to be retained for
certain packages used to ship
radioactive materials is provided in this
final rule. PHMSA expects modest
positive environmental gains due to a
projected increase in appropriately
tested and constructed packages, which
will lead to a decrease in exposure to
released radioactivity. As this change is
a result an internal PHMSA review of
existing domestic regulations, these
modest environmental gains would not
be achieved by selecting alternatives
one or two.
Requirements for leaking or suspected
leaking packages of radioactive
material, or conveyance carrying leaking
or suspected leaking unpackaged
radioactive material.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
22:43 Jul 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
PHMSA is adding new required
actions for leaking or suspect Class 7
(radioactive) packages or unpackaged
material, which include; immediate
actions and assessments, protective
requirements, recovery techniques, and
prerequisites for continued transport.
PHMSA expects modest positive
environmental impact from this
requirement. Increased clarity on
responsibilities and actions to be taken
when a leaking radioactive package is
discovered are expected to reduce
exposure to transportation workers and
the general public. Any environmental
gains from this change would be
realized under alternatives two or three.
Contamination.
PHMSA is adding new as well as
clarifying pre- and post-shipment
requirements for Class 7 (radioactive)
transport regarding external
contamination of radioactive
substances. PHMSA expects a modest
positive environmental impact from this
rulemaking. The increased clarity on
responsibilities and actions to be taken
before and after transportation will
benefit the environment, workers,
emergency responders, and the general
public by minimizing the possibility of
the unintended spread of radioactive
contamination during routine
conditions of transport. As this change
is a result an internal PHMSA review of
existing domestic regulations, these
modest environmental gains would not
be achieved by selecting alternatives
one or two.
4. Agency Consultation and Finding of
No Significant Impact
PHMSA, in consultation with the
NRC, certifies that the amendments in
this final rule will not have a significant
impact on the environment.
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
comments (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.
K. Executive Order 13609 and
International Trade Analysis
Under Executive Order 13609
(‘‘Promoting International Regulatory
Cooperation’’), agencies must consider
whether the impacts associated with
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
significant variations between domestic
and international regulatory approaches
are unnecessary or may impair the
ability of American businesses to export
and compete internationally. In meeting
shared challenges involving health,
safety, labor, security, environmental,
and other issues, international
regulatory cooperation can identify
approaches that are at least as protective
as those that are or would be adopted in
the absence of such cooperation.
International regulatory cooperation can
also reduce, eliminate, or prevent
unnecessary differences in regulatory
requirements.
Similarly, the Trade Agreements Act
of 1979 (Pub. L. 96–39), as amended by
the Uruguay Round Agreements Act
(Pub. L. 103–465), prohibits Federal
agencies from establishing any
standards or engaging in related
activities that create unnecessary
obstacles to the foreign commerce of the
United States. For purposes of these
requirements, Federal agencies may
participate in the establishment of
international standards, so long as the
standards have a legitimate domestic
objective, such as providing for safety,
and do not operate to exclude imports
that meet this objective. The statute also
requires consideration of international
standards and, where appropriate, that
they be the basis for U.S. standards.
PHMSA participates in the
establishment of international standards
to protect the safety of the American
public, and we have assessed the effects
of this final rule to ensure that it does
not cause unnecessary obstacles to
foreign trade. In fact, the rule is
designed to facilitate international trade.
Accordingly, this rulemaking is
consistent with Executive Order13609
and PHMSA’s obligations under the
Trade Agreement Act, as amended.
List of Subjects
49 CFR Part 171
Exports, Hazardous materials
transportation, Hazardous waste,
Imports, Incorporation by reference,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
49 CFR Part 172
Education, Hazardous materials
transportation, Hazardous waste,
Incorporation by reference, Labeling,
Markings, Packaging and containers,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
49 CFR Part 173
Hazardous materials transportation,
Incorporation by reference, Packaging
and containers, Radioactive materials,
E:\FR\FM\11JYR3.SGM
11JYR3
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 133 / Friday, July 11, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Uranium.
49 CFR Part 174
Hazardous materials transportation,
Radioactive materials, Railroad safety.
49 CFR Part 175
Air carriers, Hazardous materials
transportation, Incorporation by
reference, Radioactive materials,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
49 CFR Part 176
Hazardous materials transportation,
Incorporation by reference, Maritime
carriers, Radioactive materials,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
49 CFR Part 177
Hazardous materials transportation,
Motor carriers, Radioactive materials,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
49 CFR Part 178
Hazardous materials transportation,
Incorporation by reference, Motor
vehicle safety, Packaging and
containers, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
In consideration of the foregoing, 49
CFR Chapter I is amended as follows:
PART 171—GENERAL INFORMATION,
REGULATIONS, AND DEFINITIONS
1. The authority citation for part 171
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101–5128, 44701;
Pub. L. 101–410 section 4 (28 U.S.C. 2461
note); Pub. L. 104–134, section 31001; 49
CFR 1.81 and 1.97.
2. Amend § 171.7 by:
a. Revising paragraph (a)(1);
b. Removing paragraph (d)(2) and
redesignating paragraphs (d)(3) through
(8) as (d)(2) through (7) respectively;
■ c. Removing paragraph (i);
■ d. Removing paragraph (p);
■ e. Removing paragraph (ee);
■ f. Redesignating paragraphs (j)
through (o) as (i) through (m)
respectively;
■ g. Redesignating paragraphs (q)
through (dd) as (n) through (bb)
respectively; and
■ h. Revising newly designated
paragraphs (q)(1) and (u)(9) as follows:
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
■
■
■
§ 171.7
Reference material.
(a) * * *
(1) General. There is incorporated, by
reference in parts 171–180 of this
subchapter, matter referred to that is not
specifically set forth. This matter is
hereby made a part of the regulations in
VerDate Mar<15>2010
22:43 Jul 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
parts 171–180 of this subchapter. The
matter subject to change is incorporated
only as it is in effect on the date of
issuance of the regulation referring to
that matter. The material listed in
paragraphs (b) through (bb) of this
section has been approved for
incorporation by reference by the
Director of the Federal Register in
accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1
CFR part 51. Material is incorporated as
it exists on the date of the approval and
a notice of any change in the material
will be published in the Federal
Register. Matters referenced by footnote
are included as part of the regulations
of this subchapter.
*
*
*
*
*
(q) * * *
(1) No. TS–R–1, IAEA Safety
Standards for Protecting People and the
Environment; Regulations for the Safe
Transport of Radioactive Material,
(IAEA Regulations), 2009 Edition, into
§§ 171.22; 171.23; 171.26, 173.415,
173.416, 173.417, 173.473.
*
*
*
*
*
(u) * * *
(9) ISO 2919:1999(E), Radiation
Protection—Sealed radioactive
sources—General requirements and
classification, (ISO 2919), second
edition, February 15, 1999, into
§ 173.469.
*
*
*
*
*
PART 172—HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
TABLE, SPECIAL PROVISIONS,
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
COMMUNICATIONS, EMERGENCY
RESPONSE INFORMATION, TRAINING
REQUIREMENTS, AND SECURITY
PLANS
3. The authority citation for part 172
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101–5128, 44701; 49
CFR 1.81, 1.96 and 1.97.
4. In § 172.203, paragraphs (d)(2),
(d)(3), and (d)(4) are revised to read as
follows:
■
§ 172.203 Additional description
requirements.
*
*
*
*
*
(d) * * *
(2) A description of the physical and
chemical form of the material:
(i) For special form materials, the
words ‘‘special form’’ unless the words
‘‘special form’’ already appear in the
proper shipping name; or
(ii) If the material is not in special
form, a description of the physical and
chemical form of the material (generic
chemical descriptions are permitted).
(3) The maximum activity of the
radioactive contents contained in each
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40609
package during transport in terms of the
appropriate SI units (e.g., Becquerels
(Bq), Terabecquerels (TBq)). The activity
may also be stated in appropriate
customary units (e.g., Curies (Ci),
milliCuries (mCi), microCuries (uCi)) in
parentheses following the SI units.
Abbreviations are authorized. Except for
plutonium-239 and plutonium-241, the
weight in grams or kilograms of fissile
radionuclides (or the mass of each
fissile nuclide for mixtures when
appropriate) may be inserted instead of
activity units. For plutonium-239 and
plutonium-241, the weight in grams of
fissile radionuclides (or the mass of
each fissile nuclide for mixtures when
appropriate) may be inserted in addition
to the activity units.
(4) The category of label applied to
each package in the shipment. For
example: ‘‘RADIOACTIVE WHITE–I,’’ or
‘‘WHITE–I.’’
*
*
*
*
*
■ 5. In § 172.310, paragraph (b) is
revised to read as follows:
§ 172.310
Class 7 (radioactive) materials.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) Each industrial, Type A, Type
B(U), or Type B(M) package must be
legibly and durably marked on the
outside of the packaging, in letters at
least 12 mm (0.47 in) high, with the
words ‘‘TYPE IP–1,’’ ‘‘TYPE IP–2,’’
‘‘TYPE IP–3,’’ ‘‘TYPE A,’’ ‘‘TYPE B(U)’’
or ‘‘TYPE B(M),’’ as appropriate. A
package which does not conform to
Type IP–1, Type IP–2, Type IP–3, Type
A, Type B(U) or Type B(M)
requirements may not be so marked.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 6. In § 172.402, paragraph (d)(1) is
revised to read as follows:
§ 172.402 Additional labeling
requirements.
*
*
*
*
*
(d) * * *
(1) A subsidiary label is not required
for a package containing material that
satisfies all of the criteria in § 173.4,
§ 173.4a, or § 173.4b applicable to the
subsidiary hazard class.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 7. In § 172.403, paragraphs (d) and
(g)(2) are revised to read as follows:
§ 172.403
Class 7 (radioactive) material.
*
*
*
*
*
(d) EMPTY label. See § 173.428(e) of
this subchapter for EMPTY labeling
requirements.
*
*
*
*
*
(g) * * *
(2) Activity. The maximum activity of
the radioactive contents in the package
during transport must be expressed in
E:\FR\FM\11JYR3.SGM
11JYR3
40610
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 133 / Friday, July 11, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
appropriate SI units (e.g., Becquerels
(Bq), Terabecquerels (TBq)). The activity
may also be stated in appropriate
customary units (e.g., Curies (Ci),
milliCuries (mCi), microCuries (uCi)) in
parentheses following the SI units.
Abbreviations are authorized. Except for
plutonium-239 and plutonium-241, the
weight in grams or kilograms of fissile
radionuclides (or the mass of each
fissile nuclide for mixtures when
appropriate) may be inserted instead of
activity units. For plutonium-239 and
plutonium-241, the weight in grams of
fissile radionuclides (or the mass of
each fissile nuclide for mixtures when
appropriate) may be inserted in addition
to the activity units.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 8. In § 172.504, paragraph (e), footnote
1 to Table 1 is revised to read as follows:
§ 172.504 General placarding
requirements.
*
*
*
*
*
(e) * * *
1 RADIOACTIVE placards are also
required for: All shipments of
unpackaged LSA–I material or SCO–I;
all shipments required by §§ 173.427,
173.441, and 173.457 of this subchapter
to be operated under exclusive use; and
all closed vehicles used in accordance
with § 173.443(d).
*
*
*
*
*
■ 9. In § 172.505, paragraph (b) is
revised to read as follows:
§ 172.505
hazards.
Placarding for subsidiary
*
*
*
*
*
(b) In addition to the RADIOACTIVE
placard which may be required by
§ 172.504(e) of this subpart, each
transport vehicle, portable tank or
freight container that contains 454 kg
(1,001 pounds) or more gross weight of
non-fissile, fissile-excepted, or fissile
uranium hexafluoride must be
placarded with a CORROSIVE placard
on each side and each end.
*
*
*
*
*
PART 173—SHIPPERS—GENERAL
REQUIREMENTS FOR SHIPMENTS
AND PACKAGINGS
10. The authority citation for part 173
continues to read as follows:
■
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101–5128, 44701; 49
CFR 1.81, 1.96 and 1.97.
11. In § 173.4, paragraph (a)(1)(iv) is
removed and reserved, and paragraph
(b) is revised to read as follows:
■
§ 173.4
rail.
Small quantities for highway and
(a) * * *
VerDate Mar<15>2010
22:43 Jul 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
(1) * * *
(iv) [Reserved]
*
*
*
*
*
(b) A package containing a Class 7
(radioactive) material also must conform
to the requirements of § 173.421(a)(1)
through (a)(5), § 173.424(a) through (g),
or § 173.426(a) through (c) as applicable.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 12. In § 173.25, paragraph (a)(4) is
revised to read as follows:
§ 173.25 Authorized packagings and
overpacks.
(a) * * *
(4) The overpack is marked with the
word ‘‘OVERPACK’’ when specification
packagings are required, or for Class 7
(radioactive) material when a Type A,
Type B(U), Type B(M) or industrial
package is required. The ‘‘OVERPACK’’
marking is not required when the
required markings representative of
each package type contained in the
overpack are visible from the outside of
the overpack.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 13. In § 173.401, paragraph (b)(4) is
revised and a new paragraph (b)(5) is
added to read as follows:
§ 173.401
Scope.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(4) Natural material and ores
containing naturally occurring
radionuclides which are either in their
natural state, or which have only been
processed for purposes other than for
extraction of the radionuclides, and
which are not intended to be processed
for the use of these radionuclides,
provided the activity concentration of
the material does not exceed 10 times
the exempt material activity
concentration values specified in
§ 173.436, or determined in accordance
with the requirements of § 173.433.
(5) Non-radioactive solid objects with
radioactive substances present on any
surfaces in quantities not exceeding the
threshold limits set forth in the
definition of contamination in
§ 173.403.
■ 14. Section 173.403 is amended as
follows:
■ a. The definitions of ‘‘contamination,’’
‘‘criticality safety index (CSI),’’ ‘‘fissile
material,’’ ‘‘low specific activity (LSA)
material,’’ ‘‘radiation level,’’ and
‘‘uranium’’ are revised.
■ b. In the definition of ‘‘package,’’
paragraphs (2)(i), (2)(ii), and (2)(iii) are
revised to read as follows:
§ 173.403
Definitions.
*
*
*
*
*
Contamination means the presence of
a radioactive substance on a surface in
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
quantities in excess of 0.4 Bq/cm2 for
beta and gamma emitters and low
toxicity alpha emitters or 0.04 Bq/cm2
for all other alpha emitters. There are
two categories of contamination:
(1) Fixed contamination means
contamination that cannot be removed
from a surface during normal conditions
of transport.
(2) Non-fixed contamination means
contamination that can be removed from
a surface during normal conditions of
transport.
*
*
*
*
*
Criticality Safety Index (CSI) means a
number (rounded up to the next tenth)
which is used to provide control over
the accumulation of packages,
overpacks or freight containers
containing fissile material. The CSI for
a package containing fissile material is
determined in accordance with the
instructions provided in 10 CFR 71.22,
71.23, and 71.59. The CSI for an
overpack, freight container,
consignment or conveyance containing
fissile material packages is the
arithmetic sum of the criticality safety
indices of all the fissile material
packages contained within the
overpack, freight container,
consignment or conveyance.
*
*
*
*
*
Fissile material means plutonium239, plutonium-241, uranium-233,
uranium-235, or any combination of
these radionuclides. Fissile material
means the fissile nuclides themselves,
not material containing fissile nuclides,
but does not include: Unirradiated
natural uranium or depleted uranium;
and natural uranium or depleted
uranium that has been irradiated in
thermal reactors only. Certain
exceptions for fissile materials are
provided in § 173.453.
*
*
*
*
*
Low Specific Activity (LSA) material
means Class 7 (radioactive) material
with limited specific activity which is
not fissile material or is excepted under
§ 173.453, and which satisfies the
descriptions and limits set forth below.
Shielding material surrounding the LSA
material may not be considered in
determining the estimated average
specific activity of the LSA material.
LSA material must be in one of three
groups:
(1) LSA–I:
(i) Uranium and thorium ores,
concentrates of uranium and thorium
ores, and other ores containing naturally
occurring radionuclides which are
intended to be processed for the use of
these radionuclides; or
(ii) Natural uranium, depleted
uranium, natural thorium or their
E:\FR\FM\11JYR3.SGM
11JYR3
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 133 / Friday, July 11, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
compounds or mixtures, provided they
are unirradiated and in solid or liquid
form; or
(iii) Radioactive material for which
the A2 value is unlimited; or
(iv) Other radioactive material in
which the activity is distributed
throughout and the estimated average
specific activity does not exceed 30
times the values for activity
concentration specified in § 173.436 or
calculated in accordance with § 173.433,
or 30 times the default values listed in
Table 8 of § 173.433.
(2) LSA–II:
(i) Water with tritium concentration
up to 0.8 TBq/L (20.0 Ci/L); or
(ii) Other radioactive material in
which the activity is distributed
throughout and the average specific
activity does not exceed 10¥4 A2/g for
solids and gases, and 10¥5 A2/g for
liquids.
(3) LSA–III. Solids (e.g., consolidated
wastes, activated materials), excluding
powders, that meet the requirements of
§ 173.468 and in which:
(i) The radioactive material is
distributed throughout a solid or a
collection of solid objects, or is
essentially uniformly distributed in a
solid compact binding agent (such as
concrete, bitumen, ceramic, etc.);
(ii) The radioactive material is
relatively insoluble, or it is intrinsically
contained in a relatively insoluble
material, so that, even under loss of
packaging, the loss of Class 7
(radioactive) material per package by
leaching when placed in water for seven
days would not exceed 0.1 A2; and
(iii) The estimated average specific
activity of the solid, excluding any
shielding material, does not exceed 2 ×
10¥3 A2/g.
*
*
*
*
*
Package * * *
(1) * * *
(2) * * *
(i) ‘‘Industrial package Type 1 (Type
IP–1);
(ii) ‘‘Industrial package Type 2 (Type
IP–2); or
(iii) ‘‘Industrial package Type 3 (Type
IP–3).
*
*
*
*
*
Radiation level means the radiation
dose-equivalent rate expressed in
millisieverts per hour or mSv/h
(millirems per hour or mrem/h). It
consists of the sum of the doseequivalent rates from all types of
ionizing radiation present including
alpha, beta, gamma, and neutron
radiation. Neutron flux densities may be
used to determine neutron radiation
levels according to Table 1:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
22:43 Jul 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
40611
TABLE 1—NEUTRON FLUENCE RATES and Industrial Package Type 3 (Type IP–
TO BE REGARDED AS EQUIVALENT 3).
(b) Industrial package certification
TO A RADIATION LEVEL OF 0.01
and tests. (1) Each Type IP–1 package
1
mSv/h (1mrem/h)
Flux density
equivalent to
0.01 mSv/h
(1 mrem/h)
neutrons per
square
centimeter
per second
(n/cm2/s)1
Energy of neutron
Thermal (2.5 10E–8) MeV ..
1 keV ..................................
10 keV ................................
100 keV ..............................
500 keV ..............................
1 MeV .................................
5 MeV .................................
10 MeV ...............................
272.0
272.0
281.0
47.0
11.0
7.5
6.4
6.7
1 Flux densities equivalent for energies between those listed in this table may be obtained by linear interpolation.
*
*
*
*
*
Uranium—natural, depleted or
enriched means the following:
(1)(i) ‘‘Natural uranium’’ means
uranium (which may be chemically
separated) containing the naturally
occurring distribution of uranium
isotopes (approximately 99.28%
uranium-238 and 0.72% uranium-235
by mass).
(ii) ‘‘Depleted uranium’’ means
uranium containing a lesser mass
percentage of uranium-235 than in
natural uranium.
(iii) ‘‘Enriched uranium’’ means
uranium containing a greater mass
percentage of uranium-235 than 0.72%.
(2) For each of these definitions, a
very small mass percentage of uranium234 may be present.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 15. In § 173.410, paragraph (i)(3) is
revised to read as follows:
§ 173.410
General design requirements.
*
*
*
*
*
(i) * * *
(3) A package containing liquid
contents must be capable of
withstanding, without leakage, an
internal pressure that produces a
pressure differential of not less than the
maximum normal operating pressure
plus 95 kPa (13.8 psi).
■ 16. Section 173.411 is revised to read
as follows:
§ 173.411
Industrial packages.
(a) General. Each industrial package
must comply with the requirements of
this section which specifies package
tests, and record retention applicable to
Industrial Package Type 1 (Type IP–1),
Industrial Package Type 2 (Type IP–2),
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
must meet the general design
requirements prescribed in § 173.410.
(2) Each Type IP–2 package must meet
the general design requirements
prescribed in § 173.410 and when
subjected to the tests specified in
§ 173.465(c) and (d) or evaluated against
these tests by any of the methods
authorized by § 173.461(a), must
prevent:
(i) Loss or dispersal of the radioactive
contents; and
(ii) A significant increase in the
radiation levels recorded or calculated
at the external surfaces for the condition
before the test.
(3) Each Type IP–3 package must meet
the requirements for Type IP–1 and
Type IP–2 packages, and must meet the
requirements specified in § 173.412(a)
through (j).
(4) A portable tank may be used as a
Type IP–2 or Type IP–3 package
provided that:
(i) It meets the requirements for Type
IP–1 packages specified in paragraph
(b)(1);
(ii) It meets the requirements
prescribed in Chapter 6.7 of the United
Nations Recommendations on the
Transport of Dangerous Goods, (IBR, see
§ 171.7 of this subchapter),
‘‘Requirements for the Design,
Construction, Inspection and Testing of
Portable Tanks and Multiple-Element
Gas Containers (MEGCs),’’ or other
requirements at least equivalent to those
standards;
(iii) It is capable of withstanding a test
pressure of 265 kPa (38.4 psia); and
(iv) It is designed so that any
additional shielding which is provided
must be capable of withstanding the
static and dynamic stresses resulting
from handling and routine conditions of
transport and of preventing more than a
20% increase in the maximum radiation
level at any external surface of the
portable tanks.
(5) A cargo tank or a tank car may be
used as Type IP–2 or Type IP–3 package
for transporting LSA–I and LSA–II
liquids and gases as prescribed in Table
6 of § 173.427, provided that:
(i) It meets the requirements for a
Type IP–1 package specified in
paragraph (b)(1);
(ii) It is capable of withstanding a test
pressure of 265 kPa (38.4 psia); and
(iii) It is designed so that any
additional shielding which is provided
must be capable of withstanding the
static and dynamic stresses resulting
from handling and routine conditions of
transport and of preventing more than a
E:\FR\FM\11JYR3.SGM
11JYR3
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
40612
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 133 / Friday, July 11, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
20% increase in the maximum radiation
level at any external surface of the
tanks.
(6) A freight container may be used as
Type IP–2 or Type IP–3 packages
provided:
(i) The radioactive contents are
restricted to solid materials;
(ii) It meets the requirements for a
Type IP–1 packages specified in
paragraph (b)(1); and
(iii) It meets the standards prescribed
in the International Organization for
Standardization document ISO 1496–1:
‘‘Series 1 Freight Containers—
Specifications and Testing—Part 1:
General Cargo Containers; excluding
dimensions and ratings (IBR, see § 171.7
of this subchapter). It must be designed
such that if subjected to the tests
prescribed in that document and the
accelerations occurring during routine
conditions of transport it would
prevent:
(A) Loss or dispersal of the
radioactive contents; and
(B) More than a 20% increase in the
maximum radiation level at any external
surface of the freight containers.
(7) A metal intermediate bulk
containers may be used as a Type IP–
2 or Type IP–3 package, provided:
(i) It meets the requirements for a
Type IP–1 package specified in
paragraph (b)(1); and
(ii) It meets the requirements
prescribed in Chapter 6.5 of the United
Nations Recommendations on the
Transport of Dangerous Goods, (IBR, see
§ 171.7 of this subchapter),
‘‘Requirements for the Construction and
Testing of Intermediate Bulk
Containers,’’ for Packing Group I or II,
and if subjected to the tests prescribed
in that document, but with the drop test
conducted in the most damaging
orientation, it would prevent:
(A) Loss or dispersal of the
radioactive contents; and
(B) More than a 20% increase in the
maximum radiation level at any external
surface of the intermediate bulk
container.
(c) Except for Type IP–1 packages,
each offeror of an industrial package
must maintain on file for at least two
years after the offeror’s latest shipment,
and must provide to the Associate
Administrator on request, complete
documentation of tests and an
engineering evaluation or comparative
data showing that the construction
methods, package design, and materials
of construction comply with that
specification.
■ 17. In § 173.412, paragraphs (f) and
(k)(3)(ii) are revised to read as follows:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
22:43 Jul 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
§ 173.412 Additional design requirements
for Type A packages.
*
*
*
*
*
(f) The containment system will retain
its radioactive contents under the
reduction of ambient pressure to 60 kPa
(8.7 psia).
*
*
*
*
*
(k) * * *
(3) * * *
(ii) Have a containment system
composed of primary inner and
secondary outer containment
components designed to enclose the
liquid contents completely and ensure
retention of the liquid within the
secondary outer component in the event
that the primary inner component leaks.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 18. In § 173.415, paragraph (a) is
revised to read as follows:
§ 173.415
Authorized Type A packages.
*
*
*
*
*
(a) DOT Specification 7A (see
§ 178.350 of this subchapter) Type A
general packaging. Until January 1, 2017
each offeror of a Specification 7A
package must maintain on file for at
least one year after the latest shipment,
and shall provide to DOT on request,
complete documentation of tests and an
engineering evaluation or comparative
data showing that the construction
methods, packaging design, and
materials of construction comply with
that specification. After January 1, 2017
each offeror of a Specification 7A
package must maintain on file for at
least two years after the offeror’s latest
shipment, and shall provide to DOT on
request, one of the following:
(1) A description of the package
showing materials of construction,
dimensions, weight, closure and closure
materials (including gaskets, tape, etc.)
of each item of the containment system,
shielding and packing materials used in
normal transportation, and the
following:
(i) If the packaging is subjected to the
physical tests of § 173.465, and if
applicable, § 173.466, documentation of
testing, including date, place of test,
signature of testers, a detailed
description of each test performed
including equipment used, and the
damage to each item of the containment
system resulting from the tests, or
(ii) For any other demonstration of
compliance with tests authorized in
§ 173.461, a detailed analysis which
shows that, for the contents being
shipped, the package meets the
pertinent design and performance
requirements for a DOT 7A Type A
specification package.
(2) If the offeror has obtained the
packaging from another person who
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
meets the definition of ‘‘packaging
manufacturer’’ in § 178.350(c) of this
subchapter, a certification from the
packaging manufacturer that the
package meets all the requirements of
§ 178.350 for the radioactive contents
presented for transport and a copy of
documents maintained by the packaging
manufacturer that meet the
requirements of paragraph (a)(1) of this
section.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 19. In § 173.416, paragraph (c) is
revised to read as follows:
§ 173.416
Authorized Type B packages.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) A package approved by the U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission under a
special package authorization granted in
accordance with 10 CFR 71.41(d)
provided it is offered only for domestic
transportation in accordance with the
requirements in § 173.471(b) and (c).
■ 20. Section 173.417 is amended as
follows:
■ a. Paragraphs (a)(3) and(b)(3) are
removed;
■ b Table 3 is removed; and
■ c. Paragraph (c) is revised to read as
follow:
§ 173.417 Authorized fissile materials
packages.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) A package approved by the U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission under a
special package authorization granted in
accordance with 10 CFR 71.41(d)
provided it is offered only for domestic
transportation in accordance with the
requirements in § 173.471(b) and (c).
■ 21. In § 173.420, paragraph (a)(2)(ii) is
removed and reserved, paragraphs
(a)(3)(i) and (a)(6) are revised, and a new
paragraph (e) is added to read as
follows:
§ 173.420 Uranium hexafluoride (fissile,
fissile excepted and non-fissile).
(a) * * *
(2) * * *
(ii) [Reserved]
*
*
*
*
*
(3) * * *
(i) withstand a hydraulic test at an
internal pressure of at least 1.4 MPa
(200 psig) without leakage;
*
*
*
*
*
(6) The pressure in the package at
20 °C (68 °F) must be less than
101.3 kPa (14.7 psia).
*
*
*
*
*
(e) For a package containing 0.1 kg or
more of UF6, the proper shipping name
and UN number ‘‘Radioactive material,
uranium hexafluoride, UN 2978’’ must
be used for the transportation of non-
E:\FR\FM\11JYR3.SGM
11JYR3
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 133 / Friday, July 11, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
fissile or fissile-excepted uranium
hexafluoride and the proper shipping
name and UN number ‘‘Radioactive
material, uranium hexafluoride, fissile,
UN 2977’’ must be used for the transport
of fissile uranium hexafluoride.
■ 22. Section 173.421 is revised to read
as follows:
§ 173.421 Excepted packages for limited
quantities of Class 7 (radioactive) materials.
A Class 7 (radioactive) material with
an activity per package which does not
exceed the limited quantity package
limits specified in Table 4 in § 173.425,
and its packaging, are excepted from
requirements in this subchapter for
specification packaging, marking
(except for the UN identification
number marking requirement described
in § 173.422(a)), labeling, and if not a
hazardous substance or hazardous
waste, shipping papers, and the
requirements of this subpart if:
(a) Each package meets the general
design requirements of § 173.410;
(b) The radiation level at any point on
the external surface of the package does
not exceed 0.005 mSv/h (0.5 mrem/h);
(c) The non-fixed contamination on
the external surface of the package does
not exceed the limits specified in
§ 173.443(a);
(d) The outside of the inner packaging
or, if there is no inner packaging, the
outside of the packaging itself bears the
marking ‘‘Radioactive;’’
(e) The package does not contain
fissile material unless excepted by
§ 173.453; and
(f) The material is otherwise prepared
for shipment as specified in accordance
with § 173.422.
■ 23. In § 173.422, the introductory text
and paragraphs (a) and (e) are revised to
read as follows:
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
§ 173.422 Additional requirements for
excepted packages containing Class 7
(radioactive) materials.
An excepted package of Class 7
(radioactive) material that is prepared
for shipment under the provisions of
§ 173.421, § 173.424, § 173.426, or
§ 173.428, or a small quantity of another
hazard class transported by highway or
rail (as defined in § 173.4) which also
meets the requirements of one of these
sections, is not subject to any additional
requirements of this subchapter, except
for the following:
(a) The outside of each package must
be marked with:
(1) The UN identification number for
the material preceded by the letters UN,
as shown in column (4) of the
Hazardous Materials Table in § 172.101
of this subchapter; and
VerDate Mar<15>2010
22:43 Jul 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
(2) The letters ‘‘RQ’’ on a non-bulk
packaging containing a hazardous
substance.
*
*
*
*
*
(e) For a material that meets the
definition of a hazardous substance or a
hazardous waste, the shipping paper
requirements of subpart C of part 172 of
this subchapter, except that such
shipments are not subject to shipping
paper requirements applicable to Class
7 (radioactive) materials in
§§ 172.202(a)(5), 172.202(a)(6),
172.203(d) and 172.204(c)(4).
■ 24. Section 173.427 is revised to read
as follows:
§ 173.427 Transport requirements for low
specific activity (LSA) Class 7 (radioactive)
material and surface contaminated objects
(SCO).
(a) In addition to other applicable
requirements specified in this
subchapter, LSA material and SCO must
be transported in accordance with the
following conditions:
(1) The external dose rate may not
exceed an external radiation level of 10
mSv/h (1 rem/h) at 3 m (10 feet) from
the unshielded material;
(2) The quantity of LSA material and
SCO transported in any single
conveyance may not exceed the limits
specified in Table 5;
(3) LSA material and SCO that are or
contain fissile material must conform to
the applicable requirements of
§ 173.453;
(4) Packaged and unpackaged Class 7
(radioactive) materials must conform to
the contamination control limits
specified in § 173.443;
(5) External radiation levels may not
exceed those specified in § 173.441; and
(6) For LSA material and SCO
consigned as exclusive use:
(i) Shipments must be loaded by the
consignor and unloaded by the
consignee from the conveyance or
freight container in which originally
loaded;
(ii) There may be no loose radioactive
material in the conveyance; however,
when the conveyance is the packaging,
there may not be any leakage of
radioactive material from the
conveyance;
(iii) Packaged and unpackaged Class 7
(radioactive) material must be braced so
as to prevent shifting of lading under
conditions normally incident to
transportation;
(iv) Specific instructions for
maintenance of exclusive use shipment
controls shall be provided by the offeror
to the carrier. Such instructions must be
included with the shipping paper
information;
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40613
(v) The shipment must be placarded
in accordance with subpart F of part 172
of this subchapter;
(vi) For domestic transportation only,
packaged and unpackaged Class 7
(radioactive) material containing less
than an A2 quantity are excepted from
the marking and labeling requirements
of this subchapter, other than the
subsidiary hazard labeling required in
172.402(d). However, the exterior of
each package or unpackaged Class 7
(radioactive) material must be stenciled
or otherwise marked ‘‘RADIOACTIVE—
LSA’’ or ‘‘RADIOACTIVE—SCO’’, as
appropriate, and packages or
unpackaged Class 7 (radioactive)
material that contain a hazardous
substance must be stenciled or
otherwise marked with the letters ‘‘RQ’’
in association with the description in
this paragraph (a)(6)(vi); and
(vii) Transportation by aircraft is
prohibited except when transported in
an industrial package in accordance
with Table 6 of this section, or in an
authorized Type A or Type B package.
(b) Except as provided in paragraph
(c) or (d) of this section, LSA material
and SCO must be packaged as follows:
(1) In an industrial package (Type IP–
1, Type IP–2 or Type IP–3; § 173.411),
subject to the limitations of Table 6;
(2) In a DOT Specification 7A
(§ 178.350 of this subchapter) Type A
package;
(3) In any Type B(U) or B(M)
packaging authorized pursuant to
§ 173.416;
(4) For domestic transportation of an
exclusive use shipment that is less than
an A2 quantity, in a packaging which
meets the requirements of § 173.410; or
(5) In portable tanks, cargo tanks and
tank cars, as provided in
§§ 173.411(b)(4) and (5), respectively.
(c) LSA–I material and SCO–I may be
transported unpackaged under the
following conditions:
(1) All unpackaged material, other
than ores containing only naturally
occurring radionuclides, must be
transported in such a manner that under
routine conditions of transport there
will be no escape of the radioactive
contents from the conveyance nor will
there be any loss of shielding;
(2) Each conveyance must be under
exclusive use, except when only
transporting SCO–I on which the
contamination on the accessible and the
inaccessible surfaces is not greater than
4.0 Bq/cm2 for beta and gamma emitters
and low toxicity alpha emitters and 0.4
Bq/cm2 for all other alpha emitters;
(3) For SCO–I where it is reasonable
to suspect that non-fixed contamination
may exist on inaccessible surfaces in
excess of the values specified in
E:\FR\FM\11JYR3.SGM
11JYR3
40614
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 133 / Friday, July 11, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
paragraph (c)(2) of this section,
measures shall be taken to ensure that
the radioactive material is not released
into the conveyance or to the
environment; and
(4) The highway or rail conveyance
must be placarded in accordance with
subpart F of part 172 of this subchapter.
(d) LSA material and SCO that exceed
the packaging limits in this section must
be packaged in accordance with 10 CFR
part 71.
(e) Tables 5 and 6 are as follows:
TABLE 5—CONVEYANCE ACTIVITY LIMITS FOR LSA MATERIAL AND SCO
1.
2.
3.
4.
Activity limit for hold
or compartment of an
inland waterway
conveyance
Activity limit for conveyances other
than by inland waterway
Nature of material
LSA–I ................................................................................................................
LSA–II and LSA–III; Non-combustible solids ...................................................
LSA–II and LSA–III; Combustible solids and all liquids and gases ................
SCO ..................................................................................................................
No limit ..................................................
No limit ..................................................
100 A2 ...................................................
100 A2 ...................................................
No limit.
100 A2.
10 A2.
10 A2.
TABLE 6—INDUSTRIAL PACKAGE INTEGRITY REQUIREMENTS FOR LSA MATERIAL AND SCO
Industrial packaging type
Contents
Non exclusive use
shipment
Exclusive use shipment
1. LSA–I:
Solid ..............................................................................................................
Liquid .............................................................................................................
2. LSA–II:
Solid ..............................................................................................................
Liquid and gas ...............................................................................................
3. LSA–III ..............................................................................................................
4. SCO–I ...............................................................................................................
5. SCO–II ..............................................................................................................
Type IP–1 .............................................
Type IP–1 .............................................
Type IP–1.
Type IP–2.
Type
Type
Type
Type
Type
Type
Type
Type
Type
Type
IP–2
IP–2
IP–2
IP–1
IP–2
.............................................
.............................................
.............................................
.............................................
.............................................
(c) In calculating A1 and A2 values for
approval in accordance with paragraph
(b)(2) of this section:
(1) It is permissible to use an A2 value
calculated using a dose coefficient for
the appropriate lung absorption type, as
recommended by the International
Commission on Radiological Protection,
if the chemical forms of each
radionuclide under both normal and
accident conditions of transport are
taken into consideration.
*
*
*
*
*
(d) * * *
25. In § 173.433, paragraphs (b)
introductory text, (c) introductory text,
(c)(1), (d)(3) and (h) are revised to read
as follows:
■
§ 173.433 Requirements for determining
basic radionuclide values, and for the
listing of radionuclides on shipping papers
and labels.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) For individual radionuclides
which are not listed in the tables in
§ 173.435 or § 173.436 or for which no
relevant data are available:
*
*
*
*
*
IP–2.
IP–3.
IP–3.
IP–1.
IP–2.
(3) If the package contains both
special and normal form Class 7
(radioactive) material, the activity
which may be transported in a Type A
package must satisfy:
Where:
The symbols are defined as in paragraphs
(d)(1) and (d)(2) of this section.
*
*
*
*
*
(h) Tables 7 and 8 are as follows:
TABLE 7—GENERAL VALUES FOR A1 AND A2
A1
A2
Radioactive contents
(TBq)
1. Only beta or gamma emitting nuclides are known to be present ...............
2. Alpha emitting nuclides, but no beta, gamma, or neutron emitters, are
known to be present 1 ..................................................................................
3. Neutron emitting nuclides are known to be present or no relevant data
are available .................................................................................................
(TBq)
(Ci)
1 × 10¥1
2.7 × 10°
2 × 10¥2
5.4 × 10¥1
2 × 10¥1
5.4 × 100
9 × 10¥5
2.4 × 10¥3
1 × 10¥3
2.7 × 10¥2
9 × 10¥5
2.4 × 10¥3
beta or gamma emitting nuclides are also known to be present, the A1 value of 0.1 TBq (2.7 Ci) should be used.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
22:43 Jul 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\11JYR3.SGM
11JYR3
ER11JY14.096
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
1 If
(Ci)
40615
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 133 / Friday, July 11, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 8—GENERAL EXEMPTION VALUES
Activity concentration for
exempt material
Radioactive contents
(Bq/g)
26. The § 173.435 table is amended by
adding the entry under ‘‘[ADD]’’ and
revising entries under ‘‘[REVISE]’’ in the
appropriate alphabetical sequence,
Symbol of
radionuclide
(Ci/g)
(Bq)
(Ci)
1 × 101
2.7 × 10¥10
1 × 104
2.7 × 10¥7
1 × 10¥1
2.7 × 10¥12
1 × 103
2.7 × 10¥8
1 × 10¥1
1. Only beta or gamma emitting nuclides are known to be present ...............
2. Alpha emitting nuclides, but no neutron emitters, are known to be
present .........................................................................................................
3. Neutron emitting nuclides are known to be present or no relevant data
are available .................................................................................................
■
Activity limits for exempt
consignments
2.7 × 10¥12
1 × 103
2.7 × 10¥8
footnotes (a) and (c) are revised, and
footnote (h) is removed and reserved to
read as follows:
§ 173.435 Table of A1 and A2 values for
radionuclides.
*
*
*
*
*
Specific activity
Element and
atomic number
A1 (Ci) b
A1 (TBq)
A2 (Ci) b
A2 (TBq)
(TBq/g)
(Ci/g)
[ADD]
*
Kr-79 ......................
*
Krypton (36) ..........
*
*
4.0 × 10 0
*
*
1.1 × 10 2
*
*
2.0 × 10 0
*
*
5.4 × 10 1
*
4.2 × 10 4
*
*
1.1 × 10 6
*
[REVISE]
*
Cf-252 ....................
*
...............................
*
Mo-99(a)(i) .............
*
...............................
*
*
1 × 10¥1
*
1.0
*
*
2.7
*
3.0 × 10¥3
8.1 × 10¥2
*
2.7 × 10 1
*
6.0 × 10¥1
1.6 × 10 1
*
*
*
*
*
2.0 × 10 1
*
5.4 × 10 2
1.8 × 10 4
*
4.8 × 10 5
*
*
aA
1
and/or A2 values for these parent radionuclides include contributions from daughter nuclides with half-lives less than 10 days as listed in
footnote (a) to Table 2 in the ‘‘IAEA Regulations for the Safe Transport of Radioactive Material, No. TS–R–1’’ (IBR, see § 171.7 of this subchapter).
b The values of A and A in curies (Ci) are approximate and for information only; the regulatory standard units are Terabecquerels (TBq), (see
1
2
§ 171.10).
c The activity of Ir-192 in special form may be determined from a measurement of the rate of decay or a measurement of the radiation level at
a prescribed distance from the source.
*
*
*
*
*
h [Reserved]
*
*
*
*
*
27. The § 173.436 table is amended by
adding the entry under ‘‘[ADD]’’ in the
appropriate alphabetical sequence,
revising the entry under ‘‘[REVISE]’’,
■
§ 173.436 Exempt material activity
concentrations and exempt consignment
activity limits for radionuclides.
and revising footnote (b) to read as
follows:
*
Activity
concentration
for exempt
material
(Bq/g)
Symbol of radionuclide
Element and atomic number
*
*
Kr-79 ..................................................
*
*
Krypton (36) ......................................
*
Activity
concentration
for exempt
material
(Ci/g)
*
*
*
Activity limit
for exempt
consignment
(Bq)
Activity limit
for exempt
consignment
(Ci)
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
[ADD]
*
*
[REVISE]
Te-121m ............................................
*
*
*
1.0 × 10 3
*
*
1.0 × 10 2
*
*
2.7 × 10¥8
*
2.7 × 10¥9
*
*
*
*
*
nuclides and their progeny included in secular equilibrium are listed as follows:
Sr-90 Y-90
Zr-93 Nb-93m
Jkt 232001
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\11JYR3.SGM
11JYR3
*
2.7 × 10¥6
*
1.0 × 10 6
*
b Parent
22:43 Jul 10, 2014
1.0 × 10 5
*
*
VerDate Mar<15>2010
*
2.7 × 10¥5
*
40616
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 133 / Friday, July 11, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
Zr-97 Nb-97
Ru-106 Rh-106
Ag-108m Ag-108
Cs-137 Ba-137m
Ce-144 Pr-144
Ba-140 La-140
Bi-212 Tl-208 (0.36), Po-212 (0.64)
Pb-210 Bi-210, Po-210
Pb-212 Bi-212, Tl-208 (0.36), Po-212 (0.64)
Rn-222 Po-218, Pb-214, Bi-214, Po-214
Ra-223 Rn-219, Po-215, Pb-211, Bi-211, Tl-207
Ra-224 Rn-220, Po-216, Pb-212, Bi-212, Tl-208 (0.36), Po-212 (0.64),
Ra-226 Rn-222, Po-218, Pb-214, Bi-214, Bi-214, Po-214, Pb-210, Bi-210, Po-210
Ra-228 Ac-228
Th-228 Ra-224, Rn-220, Po-216, Pb-212, Bi-212, Tl-208 (0.36), Po-212(0.64)
Th-229 Ra-225, Ac-225, Fr-221, At-217, Bi-213, Po-213, Pb-209
Th-nat Ra-228, Ac-228, Th-228, Ra-224, Rn-220, Po-216, Pb-212, Bi-212, Tl-208 (0.36), Po-212 (0.64)
Th-234 Pa-234m
U-230 Th-226, Ra-222, Rn-218, Po-214
U-232 Th-228, Ra-224, Rn-220, Po-216, Pb-212, Bi-212, Tl-208 (0.36), Po-212 (0.64)
U-235 Th-231
U-238 Th-234, Pa-234m
U-nat Th-234, Pa-234m, U-234, Th-230, Ra-226, Rn-222, Po-218, Pb-214, Bi-214, Po-214, Pb-210, Bi-210, Po-210
Np-237 Pa-233
Am-242m Am-242
Am-243 Np-239
*
*
*
*
*
28. Section 173.443 is revised to read
as follows:
■
§ 173.443
Contamination control.
(a) The level of non-fixed
contamination must be kept as low as
reasonably achievable on the external
surfaces of each package, conveyance,
freight container, and overpack offered
for transport, and the internal surfaces
of each conveyance, freight container,
and overpack in which inner packages
or receptacles of Class 7 (radioactive)
materials are offered for transport.
(1) Excluding the interior surfaces of
the containment system of packages and
the internal surfaces of a conveyance,
freight container, tank, or intermediate
bulk container dedicated to the
transport of unpackaged radioactive
material in accordance with § 173.427(c)
and remaining under that specific
exclusive use, the level of non-fixed
contamination may not exceed the
limits set forth in Table 9 and must be
determined by either:
(i) Wiping an area of 300 cm2 of the
surface concerned with an absorbent
material, using moderate pressure, and
measuring the activity on the wiping
material. Sufficient measurements must
be taken in the most appropriate
locations to yield a representative
assessment of the non-fixed
contamination levels. The amount of
radioactivity measured on any single
wiping material, divided by the surface
area wiped and divided by the
efficiency of the wipe procedure (the
fraction of non-fixed contamination
transferred from the surface to the
absorbent material), may not exceed the
limits set forth in Table 9 at any time
during transport. For this purpose the
actual wipe efficiency may be used, or
the wipe efficiency may be assumed to
be 0.10; or
(ii) Alternatively, the level of nonfixed contamination may be determined
by using other methods of equal or
greater efficiency.
(2) A conveyance used for nonexclusive use shipments is not required
to be surveyed unless there is reason to
suspect that it may exhibit
contamination.
Table 9 is as follows:
TABLE 9—NON-FIXED EXTERNAL RADIOACTIVE CONTAMINATION LIMITS FOR PACKAGES
Maximum permissible limits
Contaminant
Bq/cm2
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
1. Beta and gamma emitters and low toxicity alpha emitters ...................................................
2. All other alpha emitting radionuclides ...................................................................................
(b) In the case of packages transported
as exclusive use shipments by rail or
public highway only, except as
provided in paragraph (d) of this
section, at any time during transport the
non-fixed contamination on the external
surface of any package, as well as on the
associated accessible internal surfaces of
any conveyance, overpack, or freight
container, may not exceed ten times the
levels prescribed in paragraph (a) of this
section. The levels at the beginning of
transport may not exceed the levels
prescribed in paragraph (a) of this
section.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
22:43 Jul 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
(c) Except as provided in paragraphs
(a) and (d) of this section, each
conveyance, overpack, freight container,
tank, or intermediate bulk container
used for transporting Class 7
(radioactive) materials as an exclusive
use shipment that utilizes the
provisions of paragraph (b) of this
section, § 173.427(b)(4), or § 173.427(c)
must be surveyed with appropriate
radiation detection instruments after
each exclusive use transport. Except as
provided in paragraphs (a) and (d) of
this section, these items may not be
returned to Class 7 (radioactive)
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
uCi/cm2
4
0.4
10 ¥4
10¥5
dpm/cm2
240
24
materials exclusive use transport
service, and then only for a subsequent
exclusive use shipment utilizing one of
the above cited provisions, unless the
radiation dose rate at each accessible
surface is 0.005 mSv per hour (0.5 mrem
per hour) or less, and there is no
significant non-fixed surface
contamination as specified in paragraph
(a) of this section. The requirements of
this paragraph do not address return to
service of items outside of the above
cited provisions.
(d) Paragraphs (b) and (c) of this
section do not apply to any closed
E:\FR\FM\11JYR3.SGM
11JYR3
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 133 / Friday, July 11, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
transport vehicle used solely for the
exclusive use transportation by highway
or rail of Class 7 (radioactive) material
with contamination levels that do not
exceed ten times the levels prescribed in
paragraph (a) of this section if—
(1) A survey of the interior surfaces of
the empty vehicle shows that the
radiation dose rate at any point does not
exceed 0.1 mSv/h (10 mrem/h) at the
surface or 0.02 mSv/h (2 mrem/h) at 1
m (3.3 feet) from the surface;
(2) Each vehicle is marked (e.g.
stenciled) with the words ‘‘For
Radioactive Materials Use Only’’ in
letters at least 76 millimeters (3 inches)
high in a conspicuous place on both
sides of the exterior of the vehicle; and
(3) Each vehicle is kept closed except
for loading or unloading; and
(4) Each vehicle is placarded in
accordance with subpart F of part 172
of this subchapter.
(e) If it is evident that a package of
radioactive material, or conveyance
carrying unpackaged radioactive
material, is leaking, or if it is suspected
that the package, or conveyance carrying
unpackaged material, may have leaked,
access to the package or conveyance
must be restricted and, as soon as
possible, the extent of contamination
and the resultant radiation level of the
package or conveyance must be
assessed. The scope of the assessment
must include, as applicable, the
package, the conveyance, the adjacent
loading and unloading areas, and, if
necessary, all other material which has
been carried in the conveyance. When
necessary, additional steps for the
protection of persons, property, and the
environment must be taken to overcome
and minimize the consequences of such
leakage. Packages, and conveyances
carrying unpackaged material, which
are leaking radioactive contents in
excess of limits for normal conditions of
transport may be removed to an interim
location under supervision, but must
not be forwarded until repaired or
reconditioned and decontaminated, or
as approved by the Associate
Administrator.
■ 29. In § 173.465, paragraphs (a) and
(d)(1)(i) are revised to read as follows:
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
§ 173.465
Type A packaging tests.
(a) The packaging, with contents,
must be capable of withstanding the
water spray, free drop, stacking and
penetration tests prescribed in this
section. One prototype may be used for
all tests if the requirements of paragraph
(b) of this section are met. The tests are
successful if the requirements of
§ 173.412(j) are met.
*
*
*
*
*
VerDate Mar<15>2010
22:43 Jul 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
(d) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) A total weight equal to five times
the maximum weight of the package; or
*
*
*
*
*
■ 30. In § 173.466, paragraph (a) is
revised to read as follows:
§ 173.466 Additional tests for Type A
packagings designed for liquids and gases.
(a) In addition to the tests prescribed
in § 173.465, Type A packagings
designed for liquids and gases must be
capable of withstanding the following
tests in this section. The tests are
successful if the requirements of
§ 173.412(k) are met.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 31. In § 173.469, paragraphs (b)(2)(ii),
(b)(2)(iii), (d)(1) and (d)(2) are revised,
and a new paragraph (e) is added to read
as follows:
§ 173.469 Tests for special form Class 7
(radioactive) materials.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(2) * * *
(ii) The flat face of the billet must be
2.5 cm (1 inch) in diameter with the
edge rounded off to a radius of 3 mm ±
0.3 mm (0.12 inch ± 0.012 inch).
(iii) The lead must be of hardness
number 3.5 to 4.5 on the Vickers scale
and thickness not more than 25 mm (1
inch), and must cover an area greater
than that covered by the specimen.
*
*
*
*
*
(d) * * *
(1) The impact test and the percussion
test of this section provided that the
mass of the special form material is—
(i) Less than 200 g and it is
alternatively subjected to the Class 4
impact test prescribed in ISO 2919 (IBR,
see § 171.7 of this subchapter), or
(ii) Less than 500 g and it is
alternatively subjected to the Class 5
impact test prescribed in ISO 2919 (IBR,
see § 171.7 of this subchapter); and
(2) The heat test of this section,
provided the specimen is alternatively
subjected to the Class 6 temperature test
specified in the International
Organization for Standardization
document ISO 2919 (IBR, see § 171.7 of
this subchapter).
(e) Special form materials that were
successfully tested prior to October 1,
2014 in accordance with the
requirements of paragraph (d) of this
section in effect prior to October 1, 2014
may continue to be offered for
transportation and transported without
additional testing under this section.
■ 32. In § 173.473, paragraph (a)(1) is
revised to read as follows:
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
40617
§ 173.473 Requirements for foreign-made
packages.
*
*
*
*
*
(a) * * *
(1) Have the foreign competent
authority certificate revalidated by the
U.S. Competent Authority, unless this
has been done previously. Each request
for revalidation must be in triplicate,
contain all the information required by
Section VIII of the IAEA regulations in
‘‘IAEA Regulations for the Safe
Transport of Radioactive Material, No.
TS–R–1’’ (IBR, see § 171.7 of this
subchapter), and include a copy in
English of the foreign competent
authority certificate. The request and
accompanying documentation must be
sent to the Associate Administrator for
Hazardous Materials Safety (PHH–23),
Department of Transportation, East
Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590–0001.
Alternatively, the request with any
attached supporting documentation
submitted in an appropriate format may
be sent by facsimile (fax) to (202) 366–
3753 or (202) 366–3650, or by electronic
mail to ‘‘ramcert@dot.gov.’’ Each request
is considered in the order in which it is
received. To allow sufficient time for
consideration, requests must be received
at least 90 days before the requested
effective date;
*
*
*
*
*
■ 33. In § 173.476, paragraph (a) is
revised to read as follows:
§ 173.476 Approval of special form Class 7
(radioactive) materials.
(a) Each offeror of special form Class
7 (radioactive) materials must maintain
on file for at least two years after the
offeror’s latest shipment, and provide to
the Associate Administrator on request,
a complete safety analysis, including
documentation of any tests,
demonstrating that the special form
material meets the requirements of
§ 173.469. An IAEA Certificate of
Competent Authority issued for the
special form material may be used to
satisfy this requirement.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 34. In § 173.477, paragraph (a) is
revised to read as follows:
§ 173.477 Approval of packagings
containing greater than 0.1 kg of non-fissile
or fissile-excepted uranium hexafluoride.
(a) Each offeror of a package
containing more than 0.1 kg of uranium
hexafluoride must maintain on file for at
least two years after the offeror’s latest
shipment, and provide to the Associate
Administrator on request, a complete
safety analysis, including
documentation of any tests,
demonstrating that the package meets
E:\FR\FM\11JYR3.SGM
11JYR3
40618
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 133 / Friday, July 11, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
the requirements of § 173.420. An IAEA
Certificate of Competent Authority
issued for the design of the packaging
containing greater than 0.1 kg of nonfissile or fissile-exempted uranium
hexafluoride may be used to satisfy this
requirement.
*
*
*
*
*
PART 174—CARRIAGE BY RAIL
35. The authority citation for part 174
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101–5128; 49 CFR
1.81 and 1.97.
36. In § 174.700, paragraph (e) is
removed and reserved.
■ 37. In § 174.715, paragraph (a) is
revised to read as follows:
■
§ 174.715 Cleanliness of transport vehicles
after use.
(a) Each transport vehicle used for
transporting Class 7 (radioactive)
materials under exclusive use
conditions (as defined in § 173.403 of
this subchapter) in accordance with
§ 173.427(b)(4), § 173.427(c), or
§ 173.443(b), must be surveyed with
appropriate radiation detection
instruments after each use. A transport
vehicle may not be returned to Class 7
(radioactive) materials exclusive use
transport service, and then only for a
subsequent exclusive use shipment
utilizing the provisions of any of the
paragraphs § 173.427(b)(4), § 173.427(c),
or § 173.443(b), until the radiation dose
rate at any accessible surface is 0.005
mSv per hour (0.5 mrem per hour) or
less, and there is no significant nonfixed contamination, as specified in
§ 173.443(a) of this subchapter
*
*
*
*
*
PART 175—CARRIAGE BY AIRCRAFT
38. The authority citation for part 175
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101–5128, 44701; 49
CFR 1.81 and 1.97.
39. In § 175.702, paragraph (b) is
revised to read as set forth below, and
paragraph (c) is removed:
■
§ 175.702 Separation distance
requirements for packages containing
Class 7 (radioactive) materials in cargo
aircraft.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
*
*
*
*
*
(b) In addition to the limits on
combined criticality safety indexes
stated in § 175.700(b),
(1) The criticality safety index of any
single group of packages must not
VerDate Mar<15>2010
22:43 Jul 10, 2014
Jkt 232001
exceed 50.0 (as used in this section, the
term ‘‘group of packages’’ means
packages that are separated from each
other in an aircraft by a distance of 6 m
(20 feet) or less); and
(2) Each group of packages must be
separated from every other group in the
aircraft by not less than 6 m (20 feet),
measured from the outer surface of each
group.
■ 40. In § 175.705, paragraph (c) is
revised to read as follows:
§ 175.705
Radioactive contamination.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) An aircraft in which Class 7
(radioactive) material has been released
must be taken out of service and may
not be returned to service or routinely
occupied until the aircraft is checked for
radioactive substances and it is
determined that any radioactive
substances present do not meet the
definition of radioactive material, as
defined in § 173.403 of this subchapter.
*
*
*
*
*
PART 176—CARRIAGE BY VESSEL
41. The authority citation for part 176
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101–5128; sec. 112
of Pub. L. 103–311, 108 Stat. 1673, 1676
(1994); sec. 32509 of Pub. L. 112–141, 126
Stat. 405, 805 (2012); 49 CFR 1.81 and 1.97.
44. In § 177.843 paragraph (a) is
revised to read as follows:
■
§ 177.843
Contamination of vehicles.
(a) Each motor vehicle used for
transporting Class 7 (radioactive)
materials under exclusive use
conditions in accordance with
§ 173.427(b)(4), § 173.427(c), or
§ 173.443(b) of this subchapter must be
surveyed with radiation detection
instruments after each use. A vehicle
may not be returned to Class 7
(radioactive) materials exclusive use
transport service, and then only for a
subsequent exclusive use shipment
utilizing the provisions of any of the
paragraphs § 173.427(b)(4), § 173.427(c),
or § 173.443(b), until the radiation dose
rate at every accessible surface is 0.005
mSv/h (0.5 mrem/h) or less and the nonfixed contamination is not greater than
the level prescribed in § 173.443(a) of
this subchapter.
*
*
*
*
*
■
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101–5128; 49 CFR
1.81 and 1.97.
42. Section 176.715 is revised to read
as follows:
■
§ 176.715
Contamination control.
Each hold, compartment, or deck area
used for the transportation of low
specific activity or surface contaminated
object Class 7 (radioactive) materials
under exclusive use conditions in
accordance with § 173.427(b)(4), or
§ 173.427(c) must be surveyed with
appropriate radiation detection
instruments after each use. Such holds,
compartments, and deck areas may not
be used again for Class 7 (radioactive)
materials exclusive use transport
service, and then only for a subsequent
exclusive use shipment utilizing the
provisions of § 173.427(b)(4), or
§ 173.427(c) until the radiation dose rate
at every accessible surface is less than
0.005 mSv/h (0.5 mrem/h), and the nonfixed contamination is not greater than
the limits prescribed in § 173.443(a) of
this subchapter.
PART 177—CARRIAGE BY PUBLIC
HIGHWAY
43. The authority citation for part 177
is revised to read as follows:
■
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 9990
PART 178—SPECIFICATIONS FOR
PACKAGINGS
45. The authority citation for part 178
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101–5128; 49 CFR
1.81 and 1.97.
46. In § 178.350, paragraph (c) is
revised to read as follows:
■
§ 178.350 Specification 7A; general
packaging, Type A.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) Each Specification 7A packaging
must comply with the requirements of
§§ 178.2 and 178.3. In § 178.3(a)(2) the
term ‘‘packaging manufacturer’’ means
the person certifying that the package
meets all requirements of this section.
■ 47. Section 178.356 and §§ 178.356–1
through 178.358–6 are removed.
■ 48. Section 178.358 and §§ 178.358–1
through 178.358–6 are removed.
■ 49. Section 178.360 and §§ 178.360–1
through 178.360–4 are removed.
Issued in Washington, DC, on June 27,
2014 under authority delegated in 49 CFR
1.97.
Cynthia L. Quarterman,
Administrator, Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration.
[FR Doc. 2014–15514 Filed 7–10–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–60–P
E:\FR\FM\11JYR3.SGM
11JYR3
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 133 (Friday, July 11, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 40589-40618]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-15514]
[[Page 40589]]
Vol. 79
Friday,
No. 133
July 11, 2014
Part V
Department of Transportation
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
49 CFR Parts 171, 172, 173, et al.
Hazardous Materials: Compatibility With the Regulations of the
International Atomic Energy Agency (RRR); Final Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 79 , No. 133 / Friday, July 11, 2014 / Rules
and Regulations
[[Page 40590]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
49 CFR Parts 171, 172, 173, 174, 175, 176, 177 and 178
[Docket No. PHMSA-2009-0063 (HM-250)]
RIN 2137-AE38
Hazardous Materials: Compatibility With the Regulations of the
International Atomic Energy Agency (RRR)
AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: PHMSA, in coordination with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC), is amending requirements in the Hazardous Materials Regulations
(HMR) governing the transportation of Class 7 (radioactive) materials
based on recent changes contained in the International Atomic Energy
Agency (IAEA) publication ``Regulations for the Safe Transport of
Radioactive Material, 2009 Edition, IAEA Safety Standards Series No.
TS-R-1.'' The purposes of this rulemaking are to harmonize requirements
of the HMR with international standards for the transportation of Class
7 (radioactive) materials and update, clarify, correct, or provide
relief from certain regulatory requirements applicable to the
transportation of Class 7 (radioactive) materials.
DATES: Effective date: October 1, 2014.
Voluntary compliance date: PHMSA is authorizing voluntary
compliance beginning July 11, 2014.
Delayed compliance date: Unless otherwise specified, compliance
with the amendments adopted in this final rule is required beginning
July 13, 2015.
Incorporation by reference date: The incorporation by reference of
certain publications listed in this rule is approved by the Director of
the Federal Register as of October 1, 2014.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steven Webb, Standards and Rulemaking
Division, telephone (202) 366-8553, or Michael Conroy, Engineering and
Research Division, telephone (202) 366-4545, Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 2nd Floor, Washington, DC, 20590-0001.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Executive Summary
II. Background
III. Section-by-Section Review
IV. Regulatory Analyses and Notices
A. Statutory/Legal Authority for the Rulemaking
B. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 and DOT Regulatory Policies
and
C. Procedures
D. Executive Order 13132
E. Executive Order 13175
F. Regulatory Flexibility Act, Executive Order 13272, and DOT
Policies and Procedures
G. Paperwork Reduction Act
H. Regulatory Identifier Number (RIN)
I. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
J. Environmental Assessment
K. Privacy Act
L. Executive Order 13609 and International Trade Analysis
I. Executive Summary
In this final rule, PHMSA is amending the Hazardous Materials
Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR parts 171-180) to incorporate changes adopted
in the 2009 Edition of the IAEA Safety Standards publication titled
``Regulations for the Safe Transport of Radioactive Material, 2009
Edition, Safety Requirements, No. TS-R-1'' (hereinafter referred to as
``TS-R-1.'') \1\ Additionally, PHMSA is making other changes to amend
or clarify the requirements for transport of radioactive materials.
These changes will help ensure that the classification, packaging
requirements, and hazard communication requirements for shipments of
radioactive materials provide the requisite level of public safety and
are consistent with those employed throughout the world.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ A copy of the 2009 Edition of TS-R-1may be obtained from the
U.S. distributors, Bernan, 15200 NBN Way, P.O. Box 191, Blue Ridge
Summit, PA 17214, telephone 800-865-3457, email:
customercare@bernan.com, or Renouf Publishing Company Ltd., 812
Proctor Ave., Ogdensburg, NY 13669, telephone: 1-888-551-7470,
email: orders@renoufbooks.com. An electronic copy of TS-R-1 has been
placed in the docket of this rulemaking and may also be found at the
following IAEA Web site: https://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/publications/PDF/Pub1384_web.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The harmonization of domestic and international standards for
hazardous materials transportation enhances safety by creating a
uniform framework for compliance. Harmonization also facilitates
international trade by minimizing the costs and other burdens of
complying with multiple or inconsistent safety requirements and
avoiding hindrances to international shipments. Harmonization has
become increasingly important as the volume of hazardous materials
transported in international commerce grows.
Accordingly, federal law and policy strongly favor the
harmonization of domestic and international standards for hazardous
materials transportation. The Federal hazardous materials
transportation law (Federal hazmat law; 49 U.S.C. 5101 et seq.) directs
PHMSA to participate in relevant international standard-setting bodies
and encourages DOT to align the HMR with international transport
standards to the extent practicable, while recognizing that deviations
may be appropriate, at times in the public interest (see 49 U.S.C.
5120). Under this authority, PHMSA actively participates in relevant
international standard-setting bodies and promotes the adoption of
standards consistent with the high safety standards set by the HMR.
PHMSA's continued leadership in maintaining consistency with
international regulations and enhances the hazardous materials safety
program.
II. Background
Under their respective statutory authorities, DOT and the NRC
jointly regulate the transportation of radioactive materials to, from,
and within the United States. In accordance with their July 2, 1979,
Memorandum of Understanding (a copy of which has been placed in the
docket of this rulemaking) (44 FR 38690):
1. DOT regulates both shippers and carriers with respect to:
A. Packaging requirements;
B. Communication requirements for:
[ssquf] Shipping paper contents,
[ssquf] Package labeling and marking requirements, and
[ssquf] Vehicle placarding requirements;
C. Training and emergency response requirements; and
D. Highway routing requirements.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Within DOT, PHMSA is currently delegated the authority to
carry out the functions assigned to DOT, except for highway routing
requirements which are set forth in regulations of the Federal Motor
Carrier Safety Administration. 49 CFR part 397, subpart D.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. NRC requires its licensees to satisfy requirements to protect
public health and safety and to assure the common defense and security,
and:
A. Certifies Type B and fissile material package designs and
approves package quality assurance programs for its licensees;
B. Provides technical support to PHMSA and works with PHMSA to
ensure consistency with respect to the transportation of Class 7
(radioactive) materials; and
C. Conducts inspections of licensees and an enforcement program
within its jurisdiction to assure compliance with its requirements.
Since 1968, PHMSA and the NRC (and their predecessor agencies)
have, to the extent practicable, harmonized their
[[Page 40591]]
respective regulations with international regulations of the IAEA in:
Safety Series No. 6, Regulations for the Safe Transport of
Radioactive Material, as published in 1961 and revised in 1964 and
1967. Amendments to the HMR were adopted in a final rule published on
October 4, 1968 in Docket HM-2 (33 FR 14918).
The major updates of Safety Series No. 6 in 1973 and 1985.
See the final rules published on March 10, 1983 in Docket HM-169 (48 FR
10218) and September 28, 1995, in Docket HM-169A (60 FR 50291).
The 1996 major revision to the Safety Series No. 6,
renamed ``Regulations for the Safe Transport of Radioactive Material,
1996 Edition, No. ST-1'' issued by the IAEA in 1996 and republished in
2000 to include minor editorial changes at which time the previous
title was changed to ``Regulations for the Safe Transport of
Radioactive Material, 1996 Edition, No. TS-R-1 (ST-1, Revised).'' See
the final rule published on January 26, 2004, in Docket HM-230 (69 FR
3632).
Since then, the IAEA has published amendments and revised editions
of TS-R-1 in 2003, 2005, and 2009.\3\ PHMSA published a notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM) on August 12, 2011 (76 FR 50332) that
proposed to amend the HMR to maintain alignment with the 2009 Edition
of TS-R-1, which incorporates all of the changes made to TS-R-1 in the
2003 amendments, the 2005 Edition, as well as other revisions. In this
final rule, PHMSA is adopting the proposal with some changes. In
addition to changes to harmonize with TS-R-1, PHMSA is enacting
regulatory amendments identified through internal regulatory review
processes to update, clarify, correct, or provide relief from certain
regulatory requirements applicable to the transportation of Class 7
(radioactive) materials. Notable amendments to the HMR in this final
rule include the following:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ In 2012, the IAEA published the Specific Safety
Requirements-6 (SSR-6) which may be addressed in a future
rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Revise paragraph Sec. 173.25(a)(4) to adopt the new TS-R-
1 requirement for the marking of all overpacks of Class 7 (radioactive)
packages with the word ``OVERPACK.''
Revise Sec. Sec. 172.203(d)(3) and 172.403(g) to clarify
that the total activity indicated on the shipping paper and label must
be the maximum activity during transportation.
Revise Table 1 in Sec. 172.504 to additionally require
conveyances carrying unpackaged LSA-I material or SCO-I, all
conveyances required by Sec. Sec. 173.427, 173.441, and 173.457 to
operate under exclusive use conditions, and all closed vehicles used in
accordance with Sec. 173.443(d) to be placarded. This change is a
result of internal PHMSA review.
Update definitions in Sec. 173.403 for contamination,
criticality safety index (CSI) for conveyances, fissile material, LSA,
and radiation level. These changes are proposed primarily to align with
definitions in the TS-R-1, and the change to the definition of
``criticality safety index'' is made to align with the NRC definition.
Extend the retention period for Type A, Type IP-2, and
Type IP-3 package documentation from one year to two years, to coincide
with the minimum retention period currently required for shipping
papers. PHMSA is also including more detailed language describing the
kinds of information required to be included as part of the Type A
package documentation. This change is being made based on internal
PHMSA review of existing regulations, and is intended to ensure proper
testing and preparation of these packages prior to being offered for
transportation.
Require that any conveyance, overpack, freight container,
tank, or intermediate bulk container involved in an exclusive use
shipment under Sec. 173.427 or Sec. 173.443(b) be surveyed with
appropriate radiation detection instrumentation after each such
shipment, and not be permitted to be used for another such exclusive
use shipment until the removable surface contamination meets package
contamination limits and the radiation dose rate at each accessible
surface is no greater than 0.005 mSv/h (0.5 mrem/h). These changes are
a result of internal PHMSA review.
Update matter incorporated by reference to align with
updated references in the TS-R-1 in Sec. 171.7 and applicable
sections.
Clarify labeling requirements for radioactive shipments
with subsidiary hazards in Sec. 172.402. This change is a result of
internal PHMSA review.
Require that, when it is evident that a package of
radioactive material or conveyance carrying unpackaged radioactive
material is leaking or suspected to have leaked, access to the package
or conveyance must be restricted and, as soon as possible, the extent
of contamination and the resultant radiation level of the package or
conveyance must be assessed in Sec. 173.443. This will more closely
align with the requirements in TS-R-1.
As in PHMSA's past rulemakings to incorporate updates of the IAEA
regulations into the HMR, PHMSA has worked in close cooperation with
the NRC in the development of this rulemaking. The NRC published a
parallel NPRM on May 16, 2013 (78 FR 28988). PHMSA anticipates that NRC
will publish a parallel final rule at a future date. Since the proposed
rules will be published separately, there is a risk of differences in
overlapping proposals that may affect the compatibility of the NRC and
PHMSA regulations. PHMSA and the NRC have coordinated the development
and publication schedules for the final rules. Several actions have
been taken to mitigate possible problems that may arise from such
asynchronous publication, including but not limited to: A delayed
mandatory compliance date, enforcement guidance/discretion, and
deferred consideration of a proposed change to Sec. 173.453 regarding
a fissile material exception for uranium enriched in uranium-235. PHMSA
believes these actions, most specifically the delayed mandatory
compliance date, will allow the NRC to complete its rulemaking cycle
and to publish a final rule with an effective date in line with our
effective date. This final rule addresses only the areas for which DOT
has jurisdiction as defined in the MOU with NRC.
In response to the 2011 NPRM we received comments from the
following persons, companies, associations and other entities:
Alaska Inter-Tribal Council
B&W Y-12 L.L.C. (B&W)
Energy Solutions
J. L. Shepherd & Associates (J. L. Shepherd)
Lawrence Laude
Nuclear Information and Resource Service (NIRS) & Citizens for
Alternatives to Chemical Contamination (CACC) (NIRS & CACC)
QSA Global Inc. (QSA Global)
Regulatory Resources
The Pennsylvania State University (Penn State)
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)
United States Enrichment Corporation (USEC)
Veolia ES Technical Solutions, L.L.C. (Veolia)
These comments are discussed in the section-by-section portion of
this rule.\4\ In considering each proposal in the NPRM and each
comment, we reviewed and evaluated each amendment on its own merit, on
the basis of its overall impact on transportation safety, and on the
basis of the economic implications
[[Page 40592]]
associated with its adoption into the HMR. Our goal is to harmonize the
HMR with TS-R-1 without diminishing the level of safety currently
provided by the HMR or imposing undue burdens on the regulated
community.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Comments which were outside the scope of this rulemaking are
not addressed in this final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Section-by-Section Review
Part 171
Section 171.7
In Sec. 171.7, which contains a listing of all standards
incorporated by reference into the HMR, PHMSA is replacing the 1996
edition of ``TS-R-1 (ST-1, Revised)'' with the 2009 edition of TS-R-1,
with which we are harmonizing requirements in the HMR. We are also
replacing the International Organization for Standardization standard
``ISO 2919-1980(E) Sealed radioactive sources--classification'' with
``ISO 2919-1999(E) Radiation Protection--Sealed radioactive sources--
General requirements and classification,'' applicable to Sec.
173.469(d).
We are removing from Sec. 171.7 all entries that are only listed
in Sec. Sec. 178.356 and 178.358 covering the construction and use of
20PF and 21PF specification overpacks, respectively. These overpacks
are no longer authorized in hazardous materials regulations. We are
also deleting references to 2R vessels, and any materials incorporated
by reference solely into Sec. 178.360. The specifications for these
packages are being removed from Sec. Sec. 178.356, 178.358, and
178.360, respectively, as discussed below. J. L. Shepherd raised a
concern about a possible effect on currently issued special permits
that allow use of 2R vessels, but these changes would not affect
existing special permits.
As a consequence of the removal of Sec. Sec. 178.356, 178.358, and
178.360 the following references are being removed from the list of
matter incorporated by reference in Sec. 171.7:
ANSI B16.5-77, Steel Pipe Flanges, Flanged Fittings, 1977
from Sec. 171.7(d)(2),
AWWA Standard C207-55, Steel Pipe Flanges, 1955 from Sec.
171.7(i)(1),
the reference heading for American Water Works Association
from Sec. 171.7(i); and
all listings and the reference heading for Department of
Energy under Sec. 171.8(p)
[cir] USDOE, CAPE-1662, Revision 1, and Supplement 1, Civilian
Application Program Engineering Drawings, April 6, 1988, from Sec.
171.7(p)(1)
[cir] USDOE, Material and Equipment Specification No. SP-9, Rev. 1,
and Supplement--Fire Resistant Phenolic Foam, March 28, 1968, from
Sec. 171.7(p)(2)
[cir] USDOE, KSS-471,--Proposal for Modifications to U.S.
Department of Transportation Specification 21PF-1, Fire and Shock
Resistant Phenolic Foam--Insulated Metal Overpack, November 30, 1986
from Sec. 171.7(p)(3).
Part 172
Section 172.203
This section details additional description requirements that are
required for certain shipments of hazardous materials. As proposed in
our NPRM, we are revising Sec. 172.203(d)(2) to specify that when a
material is in ``special form'' the words ``special form'' must be
included in the description, unless those words already appear in the
proper shipping name. Lawrence Laude noted that this change would
require that the offeror have the proper documentation to declare the
material as special form. We agree, but note that an offeror of special
form Class 7 material is already required to maintain documentation
showing that the material meets the special form test requirements in
Sec. 173.469 or has an IAEA Certificate of Competent Authority showing
this (see Sec. 173.476). Consequently, if such documentation does not
exist, the offeror may not classify the material as special form. An
offeror who does not have the proper special form documentation, or
does not wish to classify the material as special form, has the option
to not declare it as special form.
In our NPRM we proposed that the activity included on shipping
papers and labels required by Sec. 172.203(d)(3) should include all
parent radionuclides and daughter products, even those daughters that
have half-lives shorter than 10 days and not greater than that of the
parent. Several commenters raised concerns on our proposal. Lawrence
Laude and J.L Shepherd commented that as proposed the NPRM changes
would require listing multiple daughter products on the label with
limited space, and create a potential conflict with the 95 percent
requirement of Sec. 173.433(g). (Sec. 173.433(g). requires that those
radionuclides that constitute 95% of the total radioactive hazard,
based on nuclide-specific activity/Type A ratios, to be listed on the
shipping paper) While we did not propose any changes to the listing of
the radionuclides, but only to the total activity, we agree this could
introduce confusion between the list and the total. Lawrence Laude also
noted that the proposed change would introduce an inconsistency with
Sec. 173.433(c)(2) for the calculation of A values for chains with
short-lived daughters as that paragraph omits short-lived daughters.
Lawrence Laude and J. L. Shepherd additionally noted that the
A1 and A2 values for those radionuclides with
short-lived daughters were derived taking the presence of the short-
lived daughters into account; adding their activity would not be a fair
comparison to the A1 and A2 values and would not
be in harmony with TS[hyphen]R[hyphen]1. To avoid confusion with the
nuclides to be listed, and to maintain consistency with the calculated
A1 and A2 values, we are not adopting the
proposed requirement to include daughter products when those daughters
have half-lives less than 10 days and not greater than that of the
parent.
As proposed in the NPRM, we are also more closely aligning with the
wording in TS-R-1 by specifying that the activity should be the maximum
activity of the radioactive contents during transport. Lawrence Laude
agreed with adding ``maximum'' to require that the offeror take into
account changes in the activity due to decay and/or buildup of
daughters, and suggested it would be useful to include a short
explanation of ``maximum'' in the regulations. We believe the phrase
``maximum activity of the radioactive contents contained in each
package during transport'' is self-explanatory.
We are also amending Sec. 172.203(d)(3) to permit the mass of each
fissile nuclide for mixtures to be included when appropriate, that is,
when there is a mixture present.
Additionally, in Sec. 172.203(d)(4), we are revising the example
to clarify that the word ``RADIOACTIVE'' is not required to be included
in the description of the category of label.
Section 172.310
This section contains additional marking requirements for packages
containing Class 7 (radioactive) material. In the NPRM we proposed to
align the marking requirements in this section with the requirements in
Sec. 178.350 which references the marking requirements of Sec. 178.
3. Lawrence Laude noted that our proposed change would have the
unintended effect of requiring all Type A packages, including those
with an AF certificate of compliance, to be marked with ``DOT 7A''
which is also required by Sec. 178.350. The commenter also noted that
an alternate approach is to simply change the current marking size
requirements in Sec. 172.310 to 12 mm (0.47 inches). We agree and are
revising this paragraph accordingly.
[[Page 40593]]
Section 172.402
This section prescribes additional labeling requirements for
shipments of hazardous materials. We are revising paragraph (d)(1) to
clarify that for a package containing a Class 7 (radioactive) material
that meets the definition of one or more additional hazard classes a
subsidiary label is not required on the package if the non-radioactive
material conforms to the small quantity exception in Sec. 173.4,
excepted quantities exception in Sec. 173.4a, or de minimis exceptions
in Sec. 173.4b. Lawrence Laude suggested modification to clarify that
applicable packaging and marking requirements for the subsidiary hazard
need not be met. However, our intent is to except these packages only
from labeling. Regulatory Resources stated that paragraph (d)(1) is
redundant with the referenced paragraphs and should be deleted in its
entirety. However we are keeping the paragraph to provide clarity that
the subsidiary label is not needed in these situations.
Section 172.403
This section describes labeling requirements for shipments of Class
7 (radioactive) materials. We are correcting the reference in paragraph
(d) from Sec. 173.428(d) to Sec. 173.428(e). We are revising
paragraph (g)(2) to be consistent with the change included herein for
Sec. 172.203(d)(3) to more closely align with the wording in TS-R-1 by
specifying that the activity should be the maximum activity of the
radioactive contents during transport. In response to several comments,
and as discussed under Sec. 172.203(d)(3), we are not including the
word ``total'' before ``maximum activity''. Further, we are amending
the activity printing requirement on the RADIOACTIVE label to permit
the mass of each fissile nuclide, as appropriate for mixtures, to be
included.
Section 172.504
This section prescribes general placarding requirements. In the
NPRM we proposed to require placards to be affixed to conveyances
carrying fissile material packages, unpackaged low specific activity
(LSA) material or surface contaminated object (SCO) in category I
(i.e., LSA-I and SCO-I respectively), all conveyances required by
Sec. Sec. 173.427 and 173.441 to operate under exclusive use
conditions, and all closed vehicles used in accordance with Sec.
173.443(d). This would more closely align domestic placarding
requirements with those of TS-R-1.
Regulatory Resources and Lawrence Laude stated their belief that
packages bearing a fissile label do not warrant a radioactive placard,
as adequate controls are provided by packaging and criticality safety
index (CSI) labels. Lawrence Laude recommended that, if placarding
fissile shipments is considered necessary, placarding should be limited
to shipments required by Sec. 173.457 to be operated under exclusive
use. While adoption of placarding for all shipments of packages with
fissile labels would be consistent with the requirements of TS-R-1,
PHMSA recognizes this could be a burden for shipments of small
quantities of fissile material. We are therefore adopting the suggested
approach to require placarding only for shipments required by Sec.
173.457 to be operated under exclusive use (that is, packages with CSI
greater than 50).
Regulatory Resources stated that under the proposed requirement, a
shipper cannot ``apply full markings and labels per 49 CFR 172 Subparts
D and E on a package containing low specific activity (LSA) material or
surface contaminated objects (SCO) and ship them as exclusive use
unless the shipper placards the vehicle--regardless of the label
applied.'' While this is true, when it is not required to be shipped as
exclusive use, a shipper may apply full markings and labels per 49 CFR
part 172 subparts D and E on a package containing LSA material or SCO
and choose to not declare the shipment as exclusive use.
Regulatory Resources and Lawrence Laude noted that the placarding
of all conveyances required by Sec. 173.441 to operate under exclusive
use would extend applicability to shipments where the aggregate
transport index (TI) for packages with Radioactive Yellow II labels
exceeds 50. Regulatory Resources stated that this would provide little
benefit and would result in large training costs, though they did not
provide a specific cost estimate. PHMSA believes there is a safety
benefit to providing a clear indication to personnel that a package or
packages have TI's larger than allowed on non-exclusive use shipments.
PHMSA further believes that this benefit will exceed the costs. For
further information on costs and benefits, please see the
``placarding'' and ``benefits of the rule'' sections of the RIA placed
in the docket for this rulemaking.
Lawrence Laude noted that the use of the word ``conveyances'' in
our proposed footnote, at least as defined in Sec. 173.403, would
require vessels and aircraft to be placarded, which is not consistent
with Sec. 172.504(a). While the definition in Sec. 173.403 does not
apply to Sec. 172.504(a), we recognize that such an interpretation
could be made. USEC added that based upon previous letters of
interpretation changes to the existing text in sections to Sec.
172.504(e) and Sec. 173.427 to require only the conveyance to be
placarded and not the conveyance and the package(s) would be
beneficial. After analyzing the above comments on the NPRM, we are
revising Sec. 172.504(e) Table 1 Footnote 1 to read as set out in the
regulatory text of this rule.
Section 172.505
This section describes when placarding for subsidiary risks is
required. In paragraph (b), we proposed to remove the reference to
``low specific activity uranium hexafluoride'' to be consistent with
changes to Sec. 173.420(e). Lawrence Laude noted that the phrase
``non-fissile, fissile-excepted, or fissile uranium hexafluoride''
covers all the possible shipments requiring subsidiary placarding, so
it should suffice to just refer to ``uranium hexafluoride.'' We agree,
but choose to list the three different proper shipping names used for
uranium hexafluoride for clarity.
Part 173
Section 173.4
This section provides requirements for shipments of small
quantities by highway and rail. We proposed to revise paragraph
(a)(1)(iv) to remove the reference to Sec. 173.425, as the references
in Sec. Sec. 173.421 and 173.424 already cite the activity limits in
Sec. 173.425. Lawrence Laude noted that the reference to Sec. 173.426
should also be deleted since, as noted in the preamble, it also does
not specify a dose rate limit. The commenter also noted that the
current and proposed Sec. 173.4(b) already invoke Sec. Sec. 173.421
and 173.424 which give activity limits for the package, making the
inner receptacle activity limit references in Sec. 173.4(a)(1)(iv)
redundant. We agree and are removing paragraph (a)(1)(iv) from Sec.
173.4.
In the NPRM we proposed to revise paragraph (b) to specify that
small quantities of Class 7 (radioactive) materials must satisfy the
requirements of Sec. Sec. 173.421, 173.424, or 173.426 in their
entirety. Lawrence Laude asked for justification, noting that as
proposed, the change brings in all the requirements of Sec. 173.422,
including the requirements for notification, training, and for
hazardous waste and hazardous substances, shipping papers; not just the
marking change highlighted in our NPRM. We agree and we are revising
paragraph (b) to cite only the previously
[[Page 40594]]
referenced paragraphs while adding the similar paragraphs of Sec.
173.426. The commenter also noted that, as currently written, Sec.
173.4 does not require shipping papers for small quantity packages
containing hazardous waste or hazardous substances and suggested
considering whether this needs to be addressed. General relief
applicable to all hazard classes and divisions was not proposed in the
NPRM, and is outside the scope of this rulemaking.
Lawrence Laude suggested that PHMSA should eliminate the marking
requirements of Sec. Sec. 173.4 and 173.4a for UN2910 and UN2911
excepted packages, viewing them as redundant. We did not propose these
changes in the NPRM and such a change would be result in a substantive
change not proposed and made available for public comment. Thus, such a
change is considered outside the scope of this rulemaking. Commenters
are welcome to petition for change by following the process detailed in
Sec. Sec. 106.95 and 106.100.
Section 173.25
This section provides requirements for packages utilizing
overpacks. In the NPRM, we proposed to require the ``OVERPACK'' marking
on all overpacks containing packages of Class 7 (radioactive)
materials, unless package type markings representative of each Class 7
package contained therein are visible from the outside of the overpack.
J.L. Shepherd claimed that the historical meaning and understanding
by users of Type B packages is that ``overpacks'' are heat and impact
resistant structures, and thus the term should not be used for
cardboard boxes, shrink wrap or wooden boxes. However, we did not
propose any change to the definition of the term ``overpack'' already
found in Sec. 171.8 which does not preclude the use of cardboard
boxes, shrink wrap, or wooden boxes as overpacks. The commenter also
claimed that the IAEA has never addressed the use of ``overpacks''
related to type B shipments; however, the IAEA does define ``overpack''
in TS-R-1 which applies to all radioactive material packages and has
marking requirements for overpacks similar to those proposed in our
NPRM.
Lawrence Laude suggested deletion of the text ``(Type IP-1, -2, or
-3)'' since industrial package by definition includes Type IP-1, -2, or
-3. We agree and have made this change. He also suggested revisions to
Sec. 173.25(a)(6). However, we did not propose any changes to that
paragraph in the NPRM and so those changes are outside the scope of
this rulemaking. Clarifications were also requested on several other
portions of this section that were not within the scope of this
rulemaking. Lawrence Laude asked for clarification whether an overpack
containing only excepted packages would need to be marked only with the
UN number(s), consistent with Table 10 of TS-R-1. This is correct, but
we see no needed changes to the proposed language. Regulatory Resources
also requested we clarify the overpack marking requirements in Sec.
173.448(g)(2), which references subpart D of part 172 and Sec.
173.25(a), by removing the reference to subpart D. Although we agree
that, because the part 172 marking requirements do not cover overpacks,
this reference is unnecessary, we did not propose any changes to Sec.
173.448 in the NPRM so this is outside the scope of this rulemaking. We
may address this in a future rulemaking.
Section 173.401
This section outlines the scope of subpart I; subsection (b)
specifies materials that are outside of that scope. We are modifying
Sec. 173.401(b)(4) to add the phrase ``which are either in their
natural state, or which have only been processed for purposes other
than for extraction of the radionuclides.'' We also added ``or
determined in accordance with Sec. 173.433'' to account for
calculations for mixtures of radionuclides. We are also adding a new
paragraph (b)(5) to clarify, based on internal PHMSA review of existing
requirements, that non-radioactive solid objects with radioactive
substances present on any surfaces in quantities not exceeding the
limits cited in the definition of contamination in Sec. 173.403 are
not subject to the Class 7 (radioactive) material requirements of the
HMR.
B & W requested that we consider PHMSA interpretation 06-0274
(issued May 6, 2008) and add that contaminated items below the
consignment exemption limits are also not regulated. We believe this
concept is already addressed in the regulations as referenced in the
letter of interpretation and have not made this addition. The commenter
also requested that we recognize ``free release'' limits that have been
established by other federal agencies. We are not aware of any other
specific codified federal limits and DOT does not have authority to set
such limits.
Section 173.403
Section 173.403 contains definitions specific to Class 7
(radioactive) materials. We are revising the definitions of
``contamination,'' ``criticality safety index (CSI),'' ``fissile
material,'' ``low specific activity (LSA) material,'' ``radiation
level,'' and ``uranium.'' NIRS & CACC expressed ``serious concerns''
with the changes in the definitions but provided no specific comments.
We are changing the definition of ``contamination'' by deleting the
word ``radioactive'' from the present definitions of ``Fixed
radioactive contamination'' and ``Non-Fixed radioactive
contamination.'' In addition, we are replacing the phrase
``contamination exists in two phases'' with ``there are two categories
of contamination.'' Lawrence Laude noted that we were not consistent in
our subsequent use of the term used for ``non-fixed contamination'' in
the NPRM, using variations such as ``non-fixed (removable) radioactive
surface contamination,'' ``removable (non-fixed) radioactive
contamination,'' and ``removable radioactive surface contamination.''
We agree this could cause confusion, so we are standardizing by using
``non-fixed contamination'' as given in the definition and have made
corresponding edits to Sec. Sec. 173.421(c), 173.443, 174.715,
176.715, and 177.843.
We are revising the definition of ``criticality safety index
(CSI)'' to include the sum of criticality safety indices of all fissile
material packages contained within a conveyance. Lawrence Laude
suggested that the language ``(rounded up to the next tenth)'' should
be deleted from the definition of CSI as this is effectively addressed
in the referenced sections of 10 CFR part 71 and would seem to
eliminate a valid CSI of zero. The referenced NRC regulations contain
the same words as our definition, except the last paragraph which says,
``Any CSI greater than zero must be rounded up to the first decimal
place.'' PHMSA is not adopting the suggestion because we are consistent
with the NRC definition in 10 CFR 71.4, and we reference 10 CFR 71.59
in our definition which includes the statement, ``Any CSI greater than
zero must be rounded up to the first decimal place.'' We are revising
the definition of ``fissile material'' to align with NRC's definition
and to clarify that certain exceptions are provided in Sec. 173.453.
Lawrence Laude suggested that we adopt the IAEA definition, which makes
a distinction between fissile nuclides and fissile material, rather
than the NRC definition. We choose the NRC definition for domestic
consistency and as we believe it more precisely defines what is
intended by the regulation.
As proposed we are revising the definition of ``low specific
activity
[[Page 40595]]
(LSA) material'' to more closely align with the definitions in TS-R-1
and in the NRC regulations.
We proposed slight modifications in the definition of ``package''
to replace ``Industrial package Type 1 (IP-1) . . . (IP-2) . . . (IP-
3)'' with ``Industrial package Type 1 (Type IP-1) . . . (Type IP-2) . .
. (Type IP-3).'' However, as Lawrence Laude and USEC noted, we
introduced an error, repeating the word ``together'' under ``Industrial
package.'' We are now correcting that error and changing only the
references to package types.
We are revising the definition of ``radiation level'' to clarify
the types of radiation that contribute to the radiation level, stating
that it consists of the sum of the dose-equivalent rates from all types
of ionizing radiation present including alpha, beta, gamma, and neutron
radiation. Energy Solutions claimed this is inapplicable and overly
burdensome when applied to container/conveyance release surveys. We do
not use the term ``release survey'' in the regulations as DOT does not
regulate the transfer of radioactive materials from control while
``radiation level'' limits are given in Sec. Sec. 173.441 and 173.443.
The commenter claims that alpha emitting radionuclides are not a
contributor to external radiation dose equivalent and are already
addressed in the removable surface contamination limits prescribed in
the rule; he also claims that low-energy beta emissions should not be
of concern and that it is not possible to accurately quantify beta dose
at very low levels. We agree that for a large majority of radioactive
packages, gamma or neutron radiation is the only significant
contributor to dose at one meter from the surface of the package and
although low energy beta emissions are typically more difficult to
measure or might contribute little or even nothing to the radiation
level, it is still possible and appropriate to measure their
contribution, or the absence of any contribution, in order to ensure
radiological safety.
However there are a few packages where neutrons must be considered
(as noted in the current definition), and alpha and beta radiation
should also be considered in meeting the regulatory requirements. The
commenter proposed a new definition of ``Release Survey Effective
Radiation Dose Equivalent;'' we do not believe such a term is needed.
We are revising the definition of ``uranium'' to include natural
uranium that has not been chemically separated from accompanying
constituents. Lawrence Laude said we should consider deleting ``(which
may be chemically separated)'' as unnecessary. While this is true, we
prefer to leave the words in for clarification.
B & W suggested we also change the Sec. 173.403 definition of
``low toxicity alpha emitters'' to be consistent with the NRC and IAEA
definitions. However, we did not propose such a change in the NPRM. We
may consider changing the definition in a future rulemaking.
USEC suggested that we add a definition of ``overpack'' to Sec.
173.403 specifically for radioactive material, separate from the
definition of ``overpack'' in Sec. 171.8. While the definition in
Sec. 171.8 is different than the definition in the TS-R-1 we do not
see a need for change at this time. We did not propose such a change in
the NPRM and believe that multiple definitions within the regulations
are unnecessary.
Section 173.410
This section describes general design requirements for packages
used to ship Class 7 (radioactive) materials. In paragraph (i)(3), we
are revising the requirement for transporting liquid Class 7
(radioactive) material by air to specify that the package must be
capable of withstanding, without leakage (i.e., without release of
radioactive material), a pressure differential of not less than the
``maximum normal operating pressure'' (defined in Sec. 173.403) plus
95 kPa (13.8. psi). The HMR currently require a package to be capable
of withstanding a pressure differential of not less than 95 kPa. We are
adding the maximum normal operating pressure (defined in Sec. 173.403)
to account for the contribution of internally generated gas pressure to
the overall pressure differential.
USEC suggested we change ``13.8 psi'' to ``13.8 psia.'' We are not
making this change, because ``psi'' is consistent with similar usage in
Sec. 173.27 and other sections of the HMR. Furthermore, the
differential pressure may be either absolute or gage pressure, as long
as both points are measured in the same units.
Section 173.411
Section 173.411 provides transportation requirements for industrial
packagings. We are making several editorial revisions to improve
consistency with the nomenclature used for package types, and to
clarify the meaning of two authorized alternatives to Type IP-2 or IP-3
packages. We are replacing the word ``packaging'' with ``package'' in
each place it appears in this section. We are also replacing the terms
IP-1, IP-2, and IP-3 with Type IP-1, Type IP-2, and Type IP-3 to make
the designations for industrial packages more consistent with the
language used in the HMR for other Class 7 (radioactive) material
package types, such as Type A and Type B(U).
We proposed modifying the requirement that tests for Type IP-2 and
Type IP-3 packages must not result in a significant increase in the
external surface radiation levels, with wording to indicate that the
package tests must not result in more than a 20% increase in the
maximum radiation level at any external surface of the package,
consistent with the Sec. 173.411 requirements for tank containers,
tanks, freight containers, and metal intermediate bulk containers that
are used as Type IP-2 or Type IP-3 packages. Penn State and Lawrence
Laude stated that the 20% criterion could be difficult to meet for low-
dose-rate packages. Regulatory Resources questioned the need for change
as we had not previously adopted the IAEA approach. Regulatory
Resources claimed there is already a quantified external package
surface dose rate increase limit in Sec. 173.441. However, that
section provides the upper limits on allowable dose rates, whereas this
criterion relates to the ability of the package design to maintain its
shielding effectiveness in normal conditions of transport. Lawrence
Laude stated that the proposed change would necessitate a review of all
designs in domestic use and would entail large costs for little
benefit. We agree that compliance with the 20% criterion could be
burdensome for very low-dose-rate packages and that consideration needs
to be given to use of previously allowable packages. Due to the issues
raised we are not adopting the change to 20% at this time. However, we
are not deleting the existing requirements in Sec. 173.441 for tanks,
freight containers, and intermediate bulk containers to meet the 20%
limit and are revising the language in Sec. 173.411 to be consistent
with TS-R-1.
For consistency with the language in TS-R-1, in Sec. 173.411(b)(4)
we are replacing the phrases in paragraphs (b)(4), (b)(5), (b)(6) and
(b)(7), ``designed to satisfy'' or ``designed to conform to'' certain
requirements with the words, ``meet'' or ``designed to meet.'' In the
NPRM we proposed to use the term ``satisfy,'' but after further
consideration we believe it is clearer and simpler to instead replace
the phrases in question with ``meets,'' which is also consistent with
the language in TS-R-1.
USEC suggested that in both existing Sec. 173.411(b)(4)(iii) and
in proposed Sec. 173.411(b)(5)(ii) we indicate ``38.4 psia,'' rather
than ``37.1 psig'' as the U.S. standard or customary unit
[[Page 40596]]
equivalent to 265 kPa. We agree and are making these changes.
In Sec. 173.411(b)(5) we are removing references to DOT
Specification IM-101 and IM-102 steel portable tanks as Type IP-2 or
IP-3 packages because they are no longer listed in Part 178 of the HMR
and authorization for their use terminated on January 1, 2010 (although
their use would still be permitted if it can be shown that they meet
the requirements of Sec. 173.411(b)(4)). We are revising Sec.
173.411(b)(5) to contain the TS-R-1 requirements for cargo tanks and
tank cars.
In paragraph (c), we are extending the retention period for Type
IP-2 and Type IP-3 package documentation from one year to two years
after the offeror's latest shipment, to correspond to the minimum
period an offeror is required to retain copies of shipping papers.
Regulatory Resources noted that the shipper of a package may not be the
manufacturer of the package; in these instances, the commenter
suggested that the documentation requirements should be placed on the
manufacturer rather than the user/shipper. However, since Part 173 only
applies to shippers, any requirement on manufacturers would need to be
placed in Part 178. Furthermore, we are not introducing a new
documentation requirement here, but only extending the required
retention period. The commenter also suggested a delayed compliance
timeframe to allow use of existing documentation requirements. We feel
that this provision can be met by the delayed compliance date of this
rule.
Section 173.412
This section prescribes additional design requirements for Type A
packages. We are changing Sec. 173.412(f) to require the containment
system of a Type A package to be capable of retaining its contents
under the reduction of ambient pressure to 60 kPa (8.7 psi) instead of
the current 25 kPa (3.6 psi). Lawrence Laude expressed support for the
change on the ground that it was more representative of the reduced
pressures that could be experienced in ground transportation. J.L.
Shepherd asked whether we would require the retesting of current Type A
packages or provide a transition period. PHMSA believes that since
packages currently have to withstand a reduction in ambient pressure
from 100 kPa to 25 kPa, they should already be able to meet the new
requirement (the old requirement was to withstand a reduction of 75 kPA
(100 to 25 kpa), but now a reduction of only 40 kPa (100 kPa to 60 kPa)
will be required). USEC suggested that we should use 8.7 psia instead
of 60 kPa for clarity; we agree and have made this change.
We proposed revising Sec. 173.412(j)(2) to specify that the
maximum radiation level at the external surface of the package not
increase by more than 20%. We received multiple comments on this
proposal similar to those on the change proposed in Sec. 173.411; as
discussed above, due to the issues raised we are not adopting the
change to 20% at this time.
Paragraph (k)(3) sets forth requirements for the retention of
liquid contents in a Type A package. To provide further clarity, we are
adopting the revised wording in TS-R-1, which states that a packaging
designed for liquids must ``Have a containment system composed of
primary inner and secondary outer containment components designed to
enclose the liquid contents completely and ensure their retention
within the secondary outer component in the event that the primary
inner component leaks.''
Section 173.415
This section discusses authorized Type A packages. We proposed to
extend the retention period for Type A package documentation from one
year to two years after the offeror's latest shipment, to correspond to
the minimum period for which an offeror is currently required to retain
copies of shipping papers. We also proposed to include more detailed
language describing the kinds of information expected to be included as
part of the Type A package documentation.
While we received support from some commenters for the two-year
retention period, Lawrence Laude requested that there be a delayed
compliance period to accommodate shipments made more than one year
prior to the effective date of the final rule and for which the
documentation is no longer available. Several commenters (Veolia, J. L
Shepherd, Lawrence Laude, and Penn State) expressed concern that
current Type A package documentation would not meet the new
requirements, and that any new requirements would invalidate the use of
such packages until the documentation could be developed. Several
commenters (Veolia, J. L Shepherd, Lawrence Laude, and Penn State)
suggested a phase-in period be authorized for Type A packages currently
in use until additional detailed documentation is available.
We agree that there may be a need for a transition period until the
two-year retention period takes effect. We also agree that time may be
needed to review and upgrade documentation. Therefore, we are not
requiring compliance with the revised documentation requirements until
January 1, 2017.
Veolia stated that the offeror of a Type A package should be able
to use additional shielding or packing materials inside that package
beyond that described in the package's documentation. We disagree. The
current regulations require the packaging to be tested ``as normally
prepared for transport'' which means shielding must be considered;
additional shielding could change how the package performs and thus
would need to be evaluated.
Penn State stated that providing engineering drawings of a package
for a one-time-only shipment would increase the cost from negligible to
significant with no added benefit and suggested that minimal
documentation was required in such instances. However, the current
regulations require even single use packages to be appropriately
evaluated and documented. We agree that for some packages, engineering
drawings may not be necessary, so we are not requiring engineering
drawings in this final rule.
QSA Global and Penn State noted that in some instances, such as
when a manufacturer ships a Type A package to a customer and the
customer subsequently uses the package, following the manufacturer's
instructions for the evaluated contents, the customer should be able to
rely upon a certification from the manufacturer. Examples given include
radiopharmaceuticals, sealed sources, instruments and gauges. In such
instances, the shipper complies with the package assembly and closure
instructions provided by the package manufacturer without modifying the
design of the package system or contents except as authorized by the
manufacture (e.g., various sources authorized for a given packaging
system). It should be noted that under the existing requirements of
Sec. 173.415, the offeror must maintain the complete documentation.
QSA Global stated that full Type A package documentation files for
reusable containers can be thousands of pages in length and contain
information considered proprietary and confidential. The company
currently maintains documentation on numerous packages used for Type A
transport, and claims to provide sufficient information to ensure that
users are aware of limitations associated with content, form and
weight. The company also notes that there are hundreds of users of
their Type A package designs, and recommended that shippers of Type A
specification packages be required to
[[Page 40597]]
maintain package assembly instructions and obtain a Type A
specification certification for the package from the packaging
manufacturer.
Under the existing Sec. 178.350, the term ``packaging
manufacturer'' means the person certifying that the package meets all
requirements of that section, which can often be the offeror,
especially if the packaging or contents have been altered from that
evaluated by another party. However, we agree that there are instances
where the offeror is provided a packaging from another source for a
particular set of contents and should not be considered to be the
packaging manufacturer. Therefore, as an optional alternative to the
current and revised requirement for offerors to maintain complete
package documentation we are also including an option for offerors who
receive a packaging from another party acting as the manufacturer, to
rely on a manufacturer's certification. This certification would
include a signed statement from the manufacturer affirming that the
package meets all the requirements of Sec. 178.350 for the radioactive
contents presented for transport. This alternative creates no
obligation on manufacturers to supply such a certification; it is
merely an option available if an offeror is able to obtain the
certification from the manufacturer. In such instances, the offeror
will also be required to maintain a copy of the manufacturer's
certification, and if requested by DOT, be able to obtain a copy of the
complete documentation from the manufacturer. However, if the offeror
has modified the packaging or contents from that evaluated and
documented by the other party, the offeror must perform an evaluation
of the changes and then maintain the complete documentation which must
be provided to DOT on request. This will enable users to reuse
packagings expressly made for certain contents and rely on
documentation from another party acting as the manufacturer, but does
not allow them to modify the packaging or contents without a documented
evaluation of those changes.
Section 173.416
This section discusses authorized Type B packages. We are removing
the present paragraph (c), which allowed the continued use of an
existing Type B packaging constructed to DOT specification 6M, 20WC, or
21WC until October 1, 2008, and replacing it with a new paragraph (c)
to authorize the domestic shipment of a package conducted under a
special package authorization granted by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission in accordance with 10 CFR 71.41(d). That NRC provision is
only applicable to limited, one-time shipments of large components that
cannot be shipped inside a certified package, or for which designing a
packaging would be impracticable due to their large size.
J. L. Shepherd requested that we maintain reference to the obsolete
specification packages to allow continued use of those packages under
special permits, but removal of this paragraph would have no impact on
any such special permits. Lawrence Laude requested that we specify what
proper shipping name should be used for packages authorized by this new
paragraph. In the rulemaking establishing 10 CFR 71.41(d), the NRC
stated that, for a package approved under that paragraph, the NRC will
issue a Certificate of Compliance or other approval (i.e., special
package authorization letter). In those cases where the NRC issues a
certificate, the proper shipping name will be associated with the
certificate (e.g., ``Radioactive material, Type B(M) package, non-
fissile or fissile-excepted). In instances where the NRC issues a
special package authorization letter, the proper shipping name will be
``Radioactive material, transported under special arrangement, non-
fissile or fissile-excepted''.
Section 173.417
This section discusses authorized fissile materials packages. We
are removing the present paragraph (c), which allows the continued use
of an existing fissile material packaging constructed to DOT
specification 6L, 6M, or 1A2 until October 1, 2008. We are also
removing the references to 20 PF and 21PF overpacks in paragraphs
(a)(3), (b)(3),and (b)(3)(ii) in Table 3 because those overpacks are no
longer in service.
We are adding a new paragraph (c) to authorize the domestic
shipment of a package conducted under a special package authorization
granted by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission in accordance with 10
CFR 71.41(d). Lawrence Laude requested that we specify what proper
shipping name should be used for packages authorized by this new
paragraph. In those cases where the NRC issues a certificate, the
proper shipping name will be associated with the certificate (e.g.,
``Radioactive material, Type B(M) package, fissile). In instances where
the NRC issues a special package authorization letter, the proper
shipping name will be ``Radioactive material, transported under special
arrangement, fissile.''
Section 173.420
Section 173.420 sets forth requirements for uranium hexafluoride
(fissile, fissile excepted and non-fissile). We are removing and
reserving paragraph (a)(2)(ii), which refers to specifications for DOT-
106A multi-unit tank car tanks as these multi-unit tank car tanks are
not used, nor planned to be used for transporting UF6.
We had proposed to add the specification 30C package to the table
in Sec. 173.420(a)(2)(iii)(D). However, as USEC pointed out, the 30C
cylinder is not a Section VIII ASME pressure vessel but is an ANSI
N14.1 packaging. Therefore, we are not adding it to the table.
USEC suggested that in 173.420(a)(3)(i) we should change ``200
psi'' to ``200 psia'' and in 173.420(a)(6) we should change ``14.8
psig'' to ``14.7 psia''. For the first reference, the ANSI standard
referenced in this section uses psig, not psia, thus we are not
adopting the suggested change, but are changing it to ``200 psig''
instead. We do agree with the second suggestion as these packages are
required to be shipped with an internal pressure less than atmosphere,
and so we are adopting this change.
We proposed adding a paragraph (e) to require that, when there is
more than one way to describe a UF6 shipment, the proper
shipping name and UN number for the uranium hexafluoride should take
precedence (e.g., the uranium hexafluoride shipping description should
take precedence over the shipping description for LSA material).
Lawrence Laude noted that while the bullet-list summary of changes in
the NPRM stated that this change would apply only to shipments of 0.1
kg or more of UF6, our later discussion and draft text
applied the change to all quantities. Lawrence Laude and USEC requested
that this paragraph only apply to packages with 0.1 kg or more of
UF6, allowing small packages of uranium hexafluoride to be
re-classed as Class 8 in accordance with Sec. 173.423. We note that
because we are harmonizing with the 2009 edition of the IAEA
regulations, and this point has been raised regarding interpretation of
the corresponding paragraph in TS-R-1, we will limit application of
this paragraph to packages of 0.1 kg or more of UF6. As the
IAEA is working to clarify application of this requirement to packages
of less than 0.1 kg of UF6, we may consider changes to this
requirement in a future rulemaking.
[[Page 40598]]
Section 173.421
This section outlines requirements for excepted packages for
limited quantities of Class 7 (radioactive) materials. Presently, Sec.
173.421(b) permits excepted packages of limited quantities of
radioactive material that are a reportable quantity of hazardous
substance or waste to be shipped without having to comply with Sec.
172.203(d) or Sec. 172.204(c)(4). We are extending this relief from
these shipping paper requirements to all excepted packages that are a
hazardous substance or waste by removing Sec. 173.421(b) and adding
the exclusion from Sec. Sec. 172.203(d) and 172.204(c)(4) to Sec.
173.422.
Section 173.422
Section 173.422 sets forth additional requirements for excepted
packages containing Class 7 (radioactive) materials. PHMSA is revising
the introductory text to specify that a small quantity of another
hazard class transported by highway or rail (as defined in Sec. 173.4)
that would otherwise qualify for shipment as a Class 7 (radioactive)
material in an excepted package must also satisfy the requirements of
Sec. 173.422. Lawrence Laude suggested that we also add excepted
quantities as defined in Sec. 173.4a. However such packages are
currently covered by Sec. 173.4a(a)(3).
As noted above, Sec. 173.421(b) currently permits excepted
packages of limited quantities of radioactive material that are a
hazardous substance or hazardous waste to be shipped without having to
comply with Sec. 172.203(d) or Sec. 172.204(c)(4). We are extending
this relief from shipping paper requirements to include those excepted
packages that contain a hazardous substance or hazardous waste by
moving the exclusion from Sec. 172.203(d) and Sec. 172.204(c)(4)
provisions to Sec. 173.422(e). In the discussion in our NPRM, we
stated that we were proposing to add an exclusion from Sec.
172.202(a)(5) for such packages; however, in the draft of the
regulatory text we referenced Sec. 172.202(a)(6) instead. Lawrence
Laude suggested that we should include both paragraphs; we agree and
are including both.
We are also adding to Sec. 173.422(a) a requirement that all
excepted packages whose contents meet the definition of a hazardous
substance, be marked with the letters ``RQ''. This will provide
consistency with existing marking requirements for a package containing
a hazardous substance. Lawrence Laude and Regulatory Resources noted
that to be consistent with Sec. 172.324, this should only apply to
non-bulk excepted packages, we agree and have made that change.
Section 173.423
Section 173.423 prescribes requirements for multiple hazard limited
quantity Class 7 materials. Lawrence Laude suggested several changes to
Sec. 173.423. However, as we did not propose any changes to that
section in the NPRM, we are not adopting his proposals in this final
rule.
Section 173.427
This section prescribes transport requirements for low specific
activity (LSA) Class 7 (radioactive) material and surface contaminated
objects (SCO). In the introductory paragraph of Sec. 173.427(a), we
are changing the phrase ``LSA material and SCO . . . must be packaged''
to ``LSA material and SCO must be transported.'' This should help
clarify that paragraphs (c) and (d) apply to subcategories of LSA
material or SCO, specifically unpackaged LSA material or SCO, and LSA
or SCO which require packaging in accordance with NRC requirements in
10 CFR 71. NIRS and CACC opposed provisions in the proposed changes
that remove packaging requirements for some SCO; however, this is a
misunderstanding of these changes as no packaging changes were
proposed. Lawrence Laude noted that for consistency, Sec.
173.427(a)(2) should read ``LSA material and SCO'' instead of ``LSA and
SCO material,'' and we are adopting that correction.
In Sec. 173.427(a)(6)(v), we are removing the placarding exception
for shipments of unconcentrated uranium or thorium ores. The increased
communication requirement is intended to compensate for the fact that
packaging requirements are minimal for these materials. We are also
clarifying that all of the placarding requirements of subpart F of part
172 must be met by rewording this paragraph from referring to vehicle
placarding, to requiring appropriate placarding of the shipment.
In Sec. 173.427(a)(6)(vi), we proposed to require that when LSA
material or SCO are shipped in accordance with that paragraph and
contain a subsidiary hazard from another hazard class, Sec. 172.402(d)
labeling requirements for the subsidiary hazard would apply. Presently,
Sec. 173.427(a)(6)(vi) excepts such shipments from all marking and
labeling requirements, other than for the stenciling or marking as
``RADIOACTIVE--LSA'' or ``RADIOACTIVE--SCO,'' as appropriate. Lawrence
Laude noted that it is unclear how labels would be applied to
unpackaged material, how many labels would be required, and whether
labels or placards would be required for bulk packages with a
volumetric capacity greater than 18 m\3\ (640 ft\3\). The commenter
also claimed the proposed change has the potential for conflicting with
the proposed change to Sec. 172.402(d)(1) regarding not requiring
subsidiary labels for Class 7 packages with subsidiary hazards meeting
the requirements of Sec. Sec. 173.4, 173.4a, and 173.4b. While this
change cannot conflict with the new Sec. 172.402(d), to which
paragraph (a)(6)(vi) makes reference, the concerns on labeling of
unpackaged material are valid. Therefore, we are amending this change
to apply only to packaged material; for larger bulk packages, labels or
placards could be used as required in Sec. 172.400.
Lawrence Laude further claimed that portions of the proposed (and
existing) Sec. 173.427(a)(6) are either redundant or inconsistent with
other requirements of subpart I and recommended that paragraphs
(a)(6)(i) through (v) be deleted, that only paragraph (a)(6)(vi) be
retained, and that paragraph (a)(6)(vii) be moved to a new paragraph
(b)(6) or, alternately, a new paragraph (f). However, Sec.
173.427(a)(6) does contain some unique requirements, and the changes
suggested would be beyond the scope of what was proposed in the NPRM,
so we are not adopting them.
We are revising paragraph (b)(1) to replace ``IP-1, IP-2, or IP-3''
with ``Type IP-1, Type IP-2, or Type IP-3,'' to coincide more closely
with the IAEA nomenclature in TS-R-1.
In the NPRM we proposed to rearrange the wording in paragraph
(b)(4), to indicate that for an exclusive use shipment of less than an
A2 quantity, the packaging must meet the requirements of
Sec. 173.24a or Sec. 173.24b, depending on whether the packaging
would be considered non-bulk or bulk according to the definition in
Sec. 171.8. Lawrence Laude noted that the reference to Sec. Sec.
173.24a and 173.24b is redundant since the introductory text of Sec.
173.410, which is also referenced, includes a requirement to meet
subparts A and B of part 173, and Sec. Sec. 173.24a and 173.24b are
included in subpart B. We agree and are revising this paragraph to
reference only Sec. 173.410. Lawrence Laude also commented that we
should address issues related to bulk Type A and Type B packages.
However, we did not propose such changes in the NPRM.
In paragraph (b)(5), we are withdrawing the explicit authorization
for certain DOT Specification tank cars and cargo tanks, and replacing
it with the general authorization for use of portable tanks, cargo
tanks and tank cars as provided in Sec. 173.411. The previously
authorized DOT
[[Page 40599]]
Specification tank cars and cargo tanks are seldom used and the Sec.
173.411 requirements provided by this rulemaking offer a broader range
of options.
In Sec. 173.427(c)(3), we are changing the phrase ``where it is
suspected that non-fixed contamination exists'' to ``where it is
reasonable to suspect that non-fixed contamination exists'' to clarify
that the shipper must have a justifiable reason if it decides that it
is not necessary to take measures to ensure that contamination from
SCO-I is not released into the conveyance or the environment.
We proposed adding a new paragraph (c)(4) to require that when
unpackaged LSA-I material or SCO-I required to be transported as
exclusive use is contained in receptacles or wrapping materials, the
outer surfaces of the receptacles or wrapping materials must be marked
``RADIOACTIVE LSA-I'' or ``RADIOACTIVE SCO-I'' as appropriate. We
proposed an additional new paragraph (c)(5) to require that all highway
or rail conveyances carrying unpackaged SCO-I be placarded. USACE noted
that paragraph (c)(4) would not provide hazard communication when a
liner is shipped inside a transport vehicle (e.g. rail gondola) or an
intermodal container and suggested that the outside of the transport
vehicle and/or the receptacle or intermodal container would be the only
place the marking should be required. We agree that the proposed
markings could be obscured and we note that conveyance marking is
already covered by Sec. 173.427(a)(vi); hence we are not including
this suggestion in the final rule. Lawrence Laude suggested that for
consistency with other usage, the proposed Sec. 173.427(c)(5) should
refer to ``transport vehicle'' rather than ``highway or rail
conveyance.'' However, conveyance includes freight containers, which
sometimes need to be placarded. Lawrence Laude also asked for
clarification that the placarding requirement of paragraph (c)(5)
applies to non-exclusive use shipments of SCO-I made in accordance with
paragraph (c)(2), whereas for other LSA material and SCO shipments,
placards are only required for exclusive use shipments. Mr. Laude is
correct, in this final rule, the placarding required in paragraph
(c)(4) would only apply to exclusive use shipments, except for those
SCO-I non-exclusive use shipments cited in paragraph (c)(2).
We are modifying Table 5 by adding a separate column for
conveyances traveling by inland waterways, in which the authorized
activity limits for combustible solids, liquids and gases of LSA-II and
LSA-III and SCO would be 10% of those for other types of conveyances.
NIRS & CACC asserted that this change could weaken existing regulations
and opposed a change. However, these are newly added and more
restrictive requirements so they do not ``weaken'' the regulations. In
Table 6, we are replacing the terms IP-1, IP-2, and IP-3 with Type IP-
1, Type IP-2, and Type IP-3 to be consistent with the similar changes
made in Sec. 173.411.
Section 173.433
Section 173.433 sets forth requirements for determining
radionuclide values, and for listing radionuclides on shipping papers
and labels. In the NPRM, we proposed to revise paragraphs (b), (c),
(d)(3), and (h) Tables 7 and 8.
We are revising paragraph (b) to clarify the use of line 3 in
Tables 7 and 8 when no relevant data are available. Currently,
paragraph (b) allows use of Table 7 for values of A1 and
A2 and Table 8 for exemption values when the individual
radionuclides are not listed in Sec. Sec. 173.435 or 173.436. Tables 7
and 8 also indicate values that may be used when ``No relevant data are
available,'' but there is no reference in the text to when those
entries may be used.
We are revising paragraph (c)(1) to conform to the current wording
in TS-R-1 that ``it is permissible to use an A2 value
calculated using a dose coefficient for the appropriate lung absorption
type.'' We are also adding language to paragraph (c) to clarify that
this method of calculation only applies to the alternative specified in
paragraph (b)(2), which requires approval by the Associate
Administrator, or for international transportation, multilateral
approval from the appropriate Competent Authorities.
We are revising paragraph (d)(3) to correct incorrect references to
other paragraphs. Currently, the explanation of the symbols in
paragraph (d)(3) refers to paragraph (d)(2) and itself. We are revising
it to refer to paragraphs (d)(1) and (d)(2).
We are modifying the second category descriptions in both Tables 7
and 8, which presently read ``Only alpha emitting nuclides are known to
be present.'' To conform as nearly as possible to the current wording
in TS-R-1, we are replacing the current wording with ``Alpha emitting
nuclides, but no beta, gamma, or neutron emitters, are known to be
present'' (in Table 7), and ``Alpha emitting nuclides, but no neutron
emitters, are known to be present'' (in Table 8).
In Table 7 we are also adding a footnote for the case when alpha
emitters and beta or gamma emitters but no neutron emitters are known
to be present. The reason for this footnote is that the IAEA default
A1 value for the case when alpha emitters are known to be
present is larger than the value when only beta or gamma emitters are
known to be present; the footnote entry clarifies that if both alpha
and beta or gamma emitters are present, the lower default A1
value should be used. The lesser A1 default value that would
be prescribed in this case would be the more logical and conservative
choice. The third category presently reads ``No relevant data are
available,'' we are replacing it with ``Neutron emitting nuclides are
known to be present or no relevant data are available.'' The revised
wording clarifies that if there are different default values for
different types of radiation, the smaller, most conservative value for
the types of radiation known to be present should be used. Regulatory
Resources questioned how an A1 value can be assigned when
there are no relevant data concerning the nuclide(s); it is done by
assigning a value that is equal to the lowest entry for nuclides listed
in the table in Sec. 173.435.
Section 173.435
This section contains the table of A1 and A2
values for the most commonly transported radionuclides. We are revising
the table as follows:
In the entry for Cf-252, in column 1, the reference to
footnote (h) is removed, and in columns 3 and 4, the A1
value is revised (this adopts the new TS-R-1 value for A1,
which is the same as previously allowed by domestic exception in
footnote (h) and eliminates the domestic exception for A2);
A1 and A2 values and the intrinsic
specific activity for Krypton-79 (Kr-79) are added to the table; the A
values were calculated using the Q system, and added to TS-R-1 in its
2009 edition, and the specific activity calculated from the relation
specific activity in Bq/g = 0.693 times Avogadro's number divided by
the half-life in seconds times the atomic mass; and
In the footnotes to the table, footnote (a) is revised to
add a reference to TS-R-1 Table 2's list of daughter products, footnote
(c) is revised to clarify that the comparison of ``output'' activity to
the A-values is restricted to special form sources of Ir-192, and
footnote (h) is removed for the Cf-252 entry, as discussed above, and
reserved.
NIRS and CACC said they oppose weakening of definitions and
increases in exemption levels. However, these are not changes to
exemption levels but are corrections and clarifications.
Regulatory Resources suggested that the tables in Sec. Sec.
173.435 and 173.436 be
[[Page 40600]]
combined into a single table. We prefer to keep the current format in
order to maintain all the current content without reducing readability.
Section 173.436
This section contains exempt material activity concentrations and
exempt consignment activity limits for radionuclides. To reflect
corresponding changes in TS-R-1, we are revising the total consignment
activity exemption for Tellurium-121m (Te-121m), from 1 x 10\5\ Bq to 1
x 10\6\ Bq, and we are adding an entry for Krypton-79 (Kr-79). We are
also revising the list of parent nuclides and their progeny listed in
secular equilibrium in footnote (b) to the table. The chains for
parents Cerium-134 (Ce-134), Radon-220 (Rn-220), Thorium-226 (Th-226),
and Uranium 240 (U-240) are removed. We are adding an entry for Silver-
108m (Ag-108m).
Section 173.443
This section prescribes contamination control provisions. Paragraph
(a) provides that the level of non-fixed contamination ``must be kept
as low as resonabl[y] achievable'' and specifies alternative methods
for determining the level of non-fixed contamination, which may not
exceed certain permissible limits. The remaining paragraphs of Sec.
173.443 address situations under which a higher level of non-fixed
contamination is allowed;
When a closed transport vehicle is used only for
transportation by highway or rail of Class 7 (radioactive) material,
the contamination level on the package may be as great as ten times the
applicable limit specified in paragraph (a) if (1) a survey shows that
the radiation dose rate at any point does not exceed specified values;
(2) the outside of the vehicle is stenciled on both sides with the
words ``For Radioactive Materials Use Only'' at least three inches
high; and (3) the vehicle is kept closed excluding loading or
unloading.
Alternatively, if a package is transported as an
``exclusive use'' shipment by rail or highway, the level of non-fixed
contamination on a package during the course of transportation may be
as much as ten times the applicable limit specified in paragraph (a) so
long as:
[cir] At the beginning of transport, the level of non-fixed
contamination on the package does not exceed the applicable limit set
forth in paragraph (a); and
[cir] the transport vehicle is surveyed and is not returned to
service until the radiation does rate at each accessible surface does
not exceed a specified value and there is no significant removable
(non-fixed) surface contamination.
Paragraph (a)
The alternative methods for determining the level of non-fixed
contamination are currently set forth in paragraphs (a)(1) and (2). In
the NPRM, we proposed to redesignate these two paragraphs as paragraphs
(a)(1)(i) and (a)(1)(ii), respectively, and provide in new paragraph
(a)(2) that a ``conveyance used for non-exclusive use shipments is not
required to be surveyed unless there is reason to suspect that it may
exhibit contamination.'' We also proposed to apply the existing
requirement that the level of non-fixed (removable) radioactive
contamination on the external surfaces of each package be kept as low
as reasonably achievable on the external and internal surfaces of an
overpack, freight container, tank, intermediate bulk container (IBC),
or conveyance--but not to the internal surfaces of a conveyance,
freight container, tank or IBC dedicated to the transport of unpackaged
radioactive material in accordance with Sec. 173.427(c) and remaining
under that specific exclusive use. This change ensures that any
associated transportation equipment utilized for transportation does
not exhibit excessive levels of non-fixed (removable) radioactive
contamination and aligns the domestic contamination control
requirements with international standards in TS-R-1.
In response to comments from Lawrence Laude and Regulatory
Resources that the contamination levels should not apply to the
interior surfaces of packages, we are clarifying that the contamination
control requirements in paragraph (a) do not apply to the interior
surfaces of (1) a tank, intermediate bulk container or other
``package,'' or (2) a conveyance or freight container dedicated to the
transport of unpackaged LSA-1 material and SCO-1 in accordance with
Sec. 173.427(c) and remaining under that exclusive use.
In Table 9, which is referenced in the new Sec. 173.443(a)(1)(i),
we are changing the contamination limits in the column labeled dpm/
cm\2\ from 220 to 240 for contamination due to beta and gamma emitters
and low toxicity alpha emitters, and from 22 to 24 for contamination
due to all other alpha emitting nuclides, respectively. This will
provide the correct conversions from the 4 and 0.4 Bq/cm\2\ values.
Lawrence Laude also raised additional concerns with our proposed
changes to Sec. 173.443(a):
Mr. Laude inquired whether we should adopt any limit on
fixed contamination, because we only addressed non-fixed contamination.
We do not believe it is necessary or practical to impose fixed
contamination limits on conveyances, overpacks, or freight containers
being used for radioactive material transport, as radiation levels from
the Class 7 material would make this practice difficult and unduly
expensive, if not impossible to implement. It would also be unnecessary
since the other transport controls for the declared hazard of the
packaged or unpackaged radioactive material provides sufficient
protection. Moreover, once these conveyances, overpacks, or freight
containers are no longer used for transport of Class 7 material, they
become subject to the HMR independently for possible radioactive
material classification to address any possible fixed contamination
hazard.
Mr. Laude inquired whether the first sentence of the
proposed paragraph (a)(1) should be limited to conveyances to be
consistent with Sec. 173.427(c), which prescribes requirements for
shipping LSA-I and SCO-I in conveyances. However, a freight container
can also be used in accordance with Sec. 173.427(c) and should be
subject to these requirements. Any requirement to measure non-fixed
contamination on the internal surface of a tank or IBC is addressed by
our change to the introductory language of paragraph (a).
Finally, Mr. Laude inquired whether paragraph (a)(2)
should apply to overpacks as well as conveyances. While this seems
possible, we consider this change unnecessary because we are addressing
the misconception that conveyances used for non-exclusive use transport
were required to be routinely surveyed for contamination.
Paragraph (b)
Section 173.443(b) currently allows non-fixed radioactive
contamination limits on a package to be up to ten times the limits in
Sec. 173.443(a) during exclusive use shipments by rail or highway, if
the initial contamination is no greater than the Sec. 173.443(a)
limits. We proposed to apply this exception to the external and
internal surfaces of conveyances, overpacks, freight containers, tanks,
and IBCs, in addition to the external surfaces of each package. This
ensures that any radioactive substances on the associated items
utilized during transportation do not exceed the designated upper
limits for non-fixed (removable) radioactive contamination of the
package during transport.
In response to comments from Lawrence Laude and Regulatory
[[Page 40601]]
Resources, we are removing the reference to the ``internal surfaces''
of tanks and IBCs from the proposed Sec. 173.443(b) because they are
covered by the term ``package.'' However, we disagree that the
reference to tanks and IBCs should be removed from the ``return to
service'' provisions in Sec. 173.443(c), which should be applicable to
tanks and IBCs. And we do not find any inconsistency with the
provisions in Sec. 173.428 on the transport of empty Class 7
(radioactive) packagings.
Paragraph (c)
In paragraph (c), we proposed to replace the phrase ``returned to
service until the radiation dose at each accessible surface'' is at a
specified level with ``returned to Class 7 (radioactive) materials
exclusive use transport service, and then only for a subsequent
exclusive use shipment utilizing one of the above cited provisions,
unless the radiation dose rate at each accessible surface'' is at that
specified level. Under this proposal, with limited exceptions provided
by Sec. Sec. 173.443(a) and (d), a conveyance, freight container,
overpack, tank, or intermediate bulk container used for exclusive use
transport of radioactive materials under Sec. Sec. 173.427(b)(4),
173.427(c), or 173.443(b) would need to be surveyed with appropriate
radiation detection instruments. These conveyances, freight containers,
overpacks, tanks, or intermediate bulk containers would have to exhibit
a radiation dose rate no greater than 0.005 mSv per hour (0.5 mrem per
hour) at any accessible surface, and non-fixed radioactive surface
contamination no greater than the limits in Sec. 173.443(a), in order
to continue to be used for one of the following specified Class 7
(radioactive) materials exclusive use transport scenarios:
(1) The use of the packaging exception for less than an
A2 quantity authorized in Sec. 173.427(b)(4);
(2) The use of the authorization in Sec. 173.427(c) to ship
unpackaged LSA-I and SCO-I; or
(3) The use of the authorization in Sec. 173.443(b) to ship
packages that may develop increased contamination during transport up
to ten times the normal package limits, so long as the package meets
the non-fixed contamination limits at the beginning of transport.
The procedure described in Sec. 173.443(c) would not be
applicable, and would in fact generally be prohibited, for unrestricted
return to general service of the item or conveyance. The rationale for
this proposed change in Sec. Sec. 173.443(c), 174.715(a), 175.705(c),
176.715, and 177.843(a), is as follows:
(1) If this ``returned to service'' criterion were to be considered
a criterion for unrestricted release following exclusive use transport
of Class 7 (radioactive) materials, it would be providing a radioactive
material unrestricted transfer (free release) limit, which DOT cannot
authorize. DOT has authority only for the regulation of radioactive
material while in transport. The clearance (unrestricted or free
release) from regulatory control of radioactive materials for further
use or disposal, or ownership, is subject to regulations of the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, NRC Agreement States or is effected pursuant to
the control of the Department of Energy from their facilities (pursuant
to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as Amended and the Energy
Reorganization Act of 1974;
(2) Non-hazardous material, even foodstuffs, could be transported
in contact with these items or conveyances, and an unacceptable health
physics practice would result if these limits were construed to be a
criterion for free release (i.e., for unrestricted radioactive material
transfer);
(3) Adhering to the requirements for non-fixed contamination (no
greater than the Sec. 173.443(a) values) and radiation level (no
greater than 0.005 mSv per hour, or 0.5 mrem per hour, at the surface
of the vehicle) of Sec. 173.443(c) would not provide sufficient
protection for unrestricted transfer, considering that over time
factors such as weathering could gradually convert any fixed
contamination to non-fixed contamination; and
(4) Allowing the free release or unrestricted transfer of
radioactive material at these levels would be incompatible with
currently and generally accepted radiation protection practices.
USACE stated that the proposed rulemaking does not eliminate the
confusion about ``contamination,'' especially for internal surfaces of
conveyances, tanks, or intermediate bulk containers and whether they
can be released from non-radioactive shipments. It also noted there are
discrepancies concerning ``unrestricted release'' between PHMSA (in the
HMR) and other Federal government agencies (in various guidance
documents) and recommended that we consult with the NRC to develop
``unrestricted release'' criteria that would be applicable to both
transport and transfer. While such a project may have merit, it would
be beyond the scope of this rulemaking and could involve attempts to
reconcile non-internationally accepted standards and/or U.S. standards
that may be less restrictive or decades old. In this rulemaking, we are
adopting the most recent international standards on contamination
promulgated by the United Nations and the IAEA to be as consistent as
possible with transport safety standards required by the rest of the
countries in the world and facilitate international commerce.
Energy Solutions commented that the ``return to service''
provisions in revised paragraph (c) would create ambiguities, are
contrary to the intent of the 1979 DOT and NRC memorandum of
understanding, and are not compliant with Presidential Executive Orders
12866 and 13272, the Paperwork Reduction Act, the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act and ALARA mandates. The questions that Energy Solutions
presented and our responses are as follows:
Would a manifest be required when the package, conveyance,
overpack, freight container, tank, or intermediate bulk container meets
the return to service criteria, under the revised language? Since the
exclusive use provision would continue to apply, at a minimum, the
exclusive use requirements in Sec. 173.403 would be applicable. The
shipper must also classify and offer the material appropriate to the
hazard, as applicable.
What is the proper shipping name if the remaining material
is exempt from Class 7 transport in accordance with Sec. 173.436? If
the remaining material can be demonstrated to be exempt from the
regulations, then the HMR do not apply and therefore a proper shipping
name is not necessary.
How would the return to service requirements apply to
various hypothetical situations, such as:
[cir] If a reportable quantity of radioactive material is being
offered that is also exempt from the HMR in accordance with Sec.
173.436. We do not know of a realistic scenario that could cause this
situation to happen, but if the radioactive material can be
demonstrated to be exempt from the HMR, then the HMR do not apply.
[cir] If the radioactive Class 7 hazard present is the subsidiary
hazard of the material. We see no ambiguity; the return to service
requirements criteria apply whether the radioactive material is the
primary or subsidiary hazard.
[cir] If the conveyance returned to service under the proposed
language remains under the control of the licensee or if it must be
returned to a licensed facility? The material will need to be
transferred in accordance with the
[[Page 40602]]
transfer license conditions of the shipper, which the DOT does not
regulate.
[cir] If a closed transport vehicle meets the criteria in Sec.
173.443(d) and is marked and placarded, would a manifest would be
required and what proper shipping name should be used? The return to
service requirements in paragraph (c) do not apply to a vehicle that
meets the conditions in paragraph (d).
Overall, we disagree with Energy Solutions' position that the
proposed rulemaking does not provide the clarification DOT seeks. We
believe the proposed rulemaking clarifies possible longstanding
misinterpretations on the distinction between transport and transfer of
radioactive material and that the benefits realized for the public,
transport workers and emergency responders far outweigh any possible
disadvantages of the proposal.
We also disagree that this rulemaking is inconsistent with the 1979
Memorandum of Understanding or that it is not in ``the public
interest.'' DOT and the NRC have advised and consulted with one another
on this subject for a number of years and worked to clarify that return
to service does not refer to, and cannot be interpreted to mean,
unrestricted release or transfer. Class 7 accidental release statistics
which the commenter referred to in the comments are not applicable in
this case, because even if such accidents were to have occurred and no
hazard communications were available, there would be no way of knowing
such data should even be gathered because the human senses cannot
detect radiation. Additionally, the possible detrimental scenarios need
not be accident related, even weathering effects could possibly cause
the spread of contamination, or as stated in the proposed rulemaking
the contamination could be commingled with foodstuffs in subsequent
transports, creating an unsatisfactory health physics practice.
Based on currently-accepted health physics theory, these revisions
provide benefits to the public. Any data or documentation would be
unrevealing, as there would be no deterministic health effects observed
from low level contamination and any stochastic health effects would be
equally difficult to observe empirically.
Similarly, we do not agree with Energy Solutions' arguments that
this rulemaking fails to comply with the Executive Orders 12866 and
13271, the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, and the Paperwork Reduction
Act on the theory that the amendments proposed in the NPRM would result
in a dramatic increase in operational costs of approximately 800-1,000%
without any offsetting benefit or reduction in exposure to the public.
Energy Solutions was the only entity to assert that there would be any
increase in costs, much less the extreme increase it claimed. We
consider that some relatively minor adaptation to new practices would
enable return shipments of packages classified under a relatively lower
Class 7 hazard category, such as an excepted package, and the
regulatory benefits of modest transport requirements (primarily hazard
communication provided to transport workers, emergency responders and
members of the public) far outweigh the burden imposed.
Lastly, Energy Solutions recommended creating a new definition in
Sec. 173.403 for the term ``release survey effective radiation dose
equivalent'' and additional rewording of Sec. 173.443, as proposed in
the NPRM, to provide ``relief from the unnecessary burdens and
inaccuracies'' of the proposal. However, these recommended changes are
beyond the scope of the proposals in this rulemaking.
Regulatory Resources expressed uncertainty over what the intention
was for the proposed Sec. 173.443(c) ``return to service'' criteria,
but seemed to believe it applied primarily to packages. Our intention
is unchanged, and we believe it is widely recognized that the basic
contamination limits provided in Sec. 173.443 will not typically lead
to cross contamination of conveyances or any other items in contact
with packaged radioactive material. For this reason, we do not require
periodic radiation and contamination surveys related to non-exclusive
use transport.
At the same time, we are clarifying the return to service criteria
in this rulemaking, because regulatory relief in certain circumstances,
such as provided by Sec. Sec. 173.443(b), 173.427(b)(4), or
173.427(c), can possibly create cross contamination. For this reason,
exclusive use provisions are needed, and return to service surveys are
necessary, in order to mitigate and control the build-up of
contamination levels in undesired locations when these provisions are
utilized, while allowing flexibility and overall exposure reduction in
these instances. As noted above, there seems to be some confusion that
return to service standards can lead to a free release or unrestricted
transfer situation, for which DOT does not have authority. Rather,
exclusive use provisions may always be terminated when the items
affected have been demonstrated to be no longer subject to the HMR or
can be transported in accordance with provisions of the HMR that do not
require contamination related exclusive use transport.
Paragraph (d)
In paragraph (d), we proposed to require placarding of closed
transport vehicles used solely for the exclusive transportation by
highway or rail of Class 7 (radioactive) material packages with
contamination levels that do not exceed 10 times the package
contamination limits prescribed in Sec. 173.443(a). We proposed to add
the qualifier ``exclusive use'' to ensure that the exclusive use
requirements described under the definition of ``exclusive use'' in
Sec. 173.403 are satisfied for these shipments. In this paragraph, we
are deleting the word ``packages'' to allow this paragraph to apply to
unpackaged radioactive material, which will provide consistency with
similar requirements found in paragraphs Sec. Sec. 174.715(b) and
177.843(b).
Lawrence Laude suggested that Sec. 173.443(d)(2) be changed to
allow the words to be a ``marked'' rather than ``stenciled'' to allow
flexibility. PHMSA accepts that there are several ways to appropriately
mark the required information, and has amended the regulatory text to
allow marking, with stenciling as an example.
Paragraph (e)
In paragraph (e), we proposed to add required actions for leaking
or suspect Class 7 (radioactive) packages or unpackaged material,
including immediate actions and assessments, protective requirements,
recovery techniques, and prerequisites for continued transport. In
response to the suggestions from Regulatory Resources, we are adding
the words ``as applicable'' and changing the second sentence in the
paragraph to read ``The scope of the assessment must include, as
applicable, the package, the conveyance, the adjacent loading and
unloading areas, and, if necessary, all other material which has been
carried in the conveyance.''
Section 173.453
This section prescribes exceptions for fissile materials. In the
NPRM we proposed inserting a phrase into Sec. 173.453(d) that would
allow a fissile material exception for uranium enriched in uranium-235
to a maximum of 1 percent by weight under the conditions stated there
only if the material in question is essentially homogeneous. After
consulting with the NRC on its upcoming rulemaking, we have decided to
not make the proposed change at this
[[Page 40603]]
time. If the NRC changes the defining criteria for this radionuclide we
will update in a future rulemaking.
Regulatory Resources suggested a reorganization of Sec. 173.453(c)
for clarity. However, this was not included in our NPRM and we find the
existing language to be clear, so we are not adopting the suggested
changes.
Section 173.465
This section sets out requirements for Type A packaging tests. In
paragraph (a), we are adding a specific reference to the standard in
Sec. 173.412(j) for when a test for a Type A package is deemed to be
successful. In Sec. 173.465(d)(i), we are adopting the revised TS-R-1
language to clarify that the stacking test weight must be calculated
using five times the maximum weight of the loaded package. USEC
suggested that we reword this requirement to ``maximum allowable
package weight,'' but we choose to keep the wording shown in our NPRM
for consistency with TS-R-1.
Section 173.466
This section describes additional tests for Type A packagings
designed for liquids and gases. In paragraph (a), we are adding a
specific reference to the standard in Sec. 173.412(k) for when a test
for a Type A package designed for liquids or gases is deemed to be
successful.
Section 173.469
This section describes tests for special form Class 7 (radioactive)
materials. In paragraph (b)(2)(ii), we are replacing the word ``edges''
with the word ``edge'' since this refers to the edge of a flat circular
surface.
In paragraph (b)(2)(iii), we are revising the units of measure and
the thickness requirement for the lead sheet used for the percussion
test from ``2.5 cm (1 inch) or greater'' to ``not more than 25 mm (1
inch)'' in thickness, which is consistent with the requirement in TS-R-
1. USEC asked that there be a transition period for previously tested
materials that might not meet the revised criteria. PHMSA expects
minimal impact because alternative testing in accordance with ISO 2919
or IAEA requirements has been typically used to demonstrate compliance.
If any special form certificate renewals are impacted, they will be
evaluated on a case-by-case basis to allow for transition if necessary.
In paragraph (d)(1) we are adding an alternative to allow the use
of the ISO 2919 Class 5 impact test as an alternative to the impact and
percussion test if the mass of the special form material is less than
500 g, as this alternative was added to TS-R-1. Updated references to
the 1999 edition of ISO 2919 are being added to paragraphs (d)(1) and
(d)(2).
We are adding a provision in new paragraph (e) in Sec. 173.469 to
allow sources subjected to the ISO 2919 heat test before the effective
date of this final rule to not have to be retested to the newer
revision of ISO 2919 (i.e. ISO 2919-1999(E)) which is being
incorporated by reference in this rulemaking.
Section 173.473
This section prescribes requirements for foreign made packages. We
are revising Sec. 173.473(a)(1) to update the reference to the 2009
edition of the IAEA standards for transportation of radioactive
materials, TS-R-1.
Section 173.476
This section details the requirements for approval of special form
materials. We are revising paragraph (a) to extend the retention period
for special form documentation from one year to two years after the
offeror's latest shipment, to coincide with the minimum retention
period for shipping papers. In the NPRM we proposed revising paragraph
(d) to replace the reference to an obsolete proper shipping name with a
reference to the current proper shipping names. This change was
completed under a different rulemaking, Docket No. PHMSA-2013-0158 (HM-
244F) 78 FR 60748 (Oct. 2, 2013). Further amendment to this paragraph
is not needed in this final rule.
Lawrence Laude requested that paragraph (d) be expanded to include
packages of special form material where the activity is less than
A2 to account for special form sources with expired or
unavailable documentation which could be shipped as ``Radioactive
Material, Type A Package.'' As discussed under our changes to Sec.
172.203(d)(2), if such documentation does not exist, the shipper should
not classify the material as special form and then this paragraph would
not be applicable.
Section 173.477
This section details the requirements for approval of packagings
containing greater than 0.1 kg of non-fissile or fissile-excepted
uranium hexafluoride. In paragraph (a), we are extending the retention
period for uranium hexafluoride packaging documentation from one year
to two years after the offeror's latest shipment, to coincide with the
minimum retention period for shipping papers.
Section 174.700
We are removing and reserving paragraph (e), which provided special
handling requirements for fissile material, controlled shipments, since
that term was removed from the regulations in our January 26, 2004
rulemaking (69 FR 3632 (HM-230)). Lawrence Laude stated that paragraph
(e) should not be deleted, but should be reworded to be consistent
with, for example, Sec. 177.842(f) as ``fissile material controlled
shipments'' were replaced with exclusive use shipments with a total CSI
not to exceed 100. The commenter also stated that if this change is
intended to rely on the references to Sec. Sec. 173.457 and 173.459 in
Sec. 174.700(d), the requirements in part 177 should be similar and
the different modal requirements should be consistent. However,
paragraph (d) does provide references to Sec. Sec. 173.457 and
173.459, as does Sec. 177.842(f). The commenter also proposed deletion
of Sec. 173.459, but as we did not include any proposed changes to
that section in the NPRM we are not adopting that suggestion.
Section 174.715
This section prescribes requirements for cleanliness of rail
transport vehicles after use. We are revising Sec. 174.715(a) to make
this section consistent with the changes being made in Sec. 173.443(c)
to clarify the phrase ``returned to service.''
Section 175.702
This section provides separation distance requirements for packages
containing Class 7 (radioactive) materials in cargo aircraft. In the
NPRM we proposed changes to Sec. 175.702(b) and (c) to include
references to the CSI limits in Sec. 175.700(b). Lawrence Laude noted
that this paragraph is inconsistent with TS-R-1, which does not have
limits on groups of packages beyond the limits for the entire aircraft.
We agree that this paragraph is more stringent than TS-R-1, but not
otherwise contradictory. In other words, compliance with the existing
requirements of Sec. 175.702(b) satisfies the (lesser) requirements in
TS-R-1. As such, we are adopting the changes to Sec. 175.702 as
proposed in the NPRM.
Section 175.705
This section describes requirements concerning radioactive
contamination of aircraft. In paragraph (c) we are clarifying that the
totality of any radioactive substances remaining after clean-up of an
aircraft where radioactive material has been released must not meet the
definition of radioactive material (as defined in Sec. 173.403) before
[[Page 40604]]
returning the aircraft to service. Lawrence Laude noted the proposed
change to Sec. 175.705 appears to be more stringent than the
requirement for other modes as well as the non-fixed contamination
limits in Sec. 173.443(a). The commenter is correct in noting the
contamination related requirements for aircraft are different from the
other modes. The differences are a result of the evolution of the
requirements, dating back to aircraft contamination events that
occurred in the 1960s. However, it should be noted that the
contamination limits in Sec. 173.443 apply to packages, conveyances
and other related items that are offered for Class 7 transport. It
should also be noted that Sec. 173.443(a) does not just require
compliance with the Table 9 limits, but also that contamination be kept
as low as reasonably achievable.
Section 176.715
This section describes requirements concerning radioactive
contamination of vessels. We are revising Sec. 176.715 to make this
section consistent with the changes being made in Sec. 173.443(c) to
clarify when holds, compartments, or deck areas used for the
transportation of LSA material or SCO under exclusive use conditions
may be ``used again'' (i.e. ``returned to service''). Lawrence Laude
stated these changes to Sec. 176.715 would add increased ambiguity
rather than eliminating it because it does not specifically address
contamination limits for holds, compartments, and deck areas being
returned to general service. The commenter also stated it was
questionable whether a deck area would be used for unpackaged
radioactive material. We believe the definition of contamination in
conjunction with the new scope exclusion provided in Sec.
173.401(b)(5) provides clear guidance as to when the HMR is applicable
in these transport cases cited by the commenter, as well as all other
transport scenarios. However, any further transfer or ownership
criteria of radioactive material will be regulated separately by the
applicable licensing authority. Use of a deck area for unpackaged
transport is conceivable in accordance with Sec. 173.427(c), so it is
not appropriate to revise this wording.
Section 177.843
This section describes requirements concerning radioactive
contamination of vehicles. In Sec. 177.843(a), PHMSA is adding a
reference to Sec. 173.443(b). This is part of a larger proposed change
developed from PHMSA internal review, that is intended to make this
section consistent with the changes proposed in Sec. 173.443(c). In
this final rule, PHMSA is modifying Sec. 173.443(c), to eliminate the
ambiguity and confusion concerning the phrase ``returned to service,''
for conveyances, overpacks, freight containers, tanks, and intermediate
bulk containers that may have had radioactive substances deposited on
them during certain Class 7 (radioactive) exclusive use transport
scenarios.
Lawrence Laude suggested that Sec. 177.843 fails to address the
contamination limits to be applied to motor vehicles being returned to
general service. We believe the definition of contamination in
conjunction with the new scope of exclusions provided in Sec.
173.401(b)(5) will provide clear guidance as to when the HMR is
applicable in these transport cases cited by the commenter, as well as
all other possible transport scenarios. However, any further transfer
or ownership criteria of radioactive material will be regulated
separately by the applicable licensing agency.
Lawrence Laude further stated the current and proposed Sec.
177.843(a) requires that motor vehicles used for an exclusive use
shipment of LSA material or SCO per Sec. 173.427(b)(4) must be
surveyed for contamination after each use. The commenter also noted
Sec. 173.427(b)(4) allows LSA material and SCO to be shipped in
packages meeting the performance based criteria of Sec. 173.410 and
these are the same criteria that Type IP-1 packages have to meet, yet
exclusive use shipments of LSA material and SCO in Type IP-1 packages
do not require vehicle surveys after use. For consistency, the
commenter recommended that the requirement for surveying vehicles used
for Sec. 173.427(b)(4) shipments be deleted from Sec. 177.843(a) and
the corresponding sections of Parts 174 and 176. We believe the
commenter failed to note the longstanding domestic exception in Sec.
173.427(b)(4) permits liquid LSA-I, LSA-II, LSA-III and SCO-II to be
transported in a Type IP-1 package, under certain conditions, rather
than a Type IP-2 or Type IP-3 as required by Table 6 in Sec. 173.427.
This practice has been demonstrated to provide needed flexibility and
an effective level of safety for several decades. A shipper is not
required to package in accordance with Sec. 173.427(b)(4) and may
elect to ship solid LSA-I and SCO-I in a Type IP-1 non-exclusive use in
accordance with Sec. 173.427(b)(1) and Table 6 in Sec. 173.427. A
shipper may also elect to package in accordance with Sec. Sec.
173.427(b)(2), (3), or (5), which would not necessarily require the
survey required by Sec. 177.843(a).
Section 178.350
This section provides specifications for specification 7A packages.
We are revising paragraph (c) to clarify that a DOT Specification 7A
Type A package must satisfy the requirements of Sec. 178.2 as well as
the marking requirements of Sec. 178.3.
Sections 178.356, 176.356-1 through178.356-5
These sections provide specifications for specification 20PF
phenolic-foam insulated, metal overpacks. USEC noted that this section,
along with the sections cited below on the 21PF overpacks, should also
be deleted in its entirety, as the 20PF series overpacks are old
specification packages that also are no longer in service. We agree,
and are removing and reserving these sections.
Sections 178.358, 178.358-1 through 178.358-6
These sections provide specifications for specification 21PF fire
and shock resistant, phenolic-foam insulated, metal overpacks. We are
removing Sec. Sec. 178.358 and 178.358-1 through 178.358-6 because
21PF overpacks for uranium hexafluoride cylinders are no longer
authorized.
Sections 178.360, 178.360-1 through 178.360-4
These sections provide specifications for specification 2R: Inside
containment vessels. We are removing Sec. Sec. 178.360, and 178.360-1
through 178.360-4 pertaining to the DOT Specification 2R inside
containment vessel since specification 2R was only required, under
certain conditions, to be used as the inner container for the DOT
Specification 20WC, 21WC, 6L, and 6M packages, and authorization for
use of these latter packages was terminated on October 1, 2008. J. L.
Shepherd was concerned that removal of the 2R specification would
impact Special Permits that include their usage; however, this change
would not directly affect such Special Permits.
IV. Regulatory Analyses and Notices
A. Statutory/Legal Authority for This Rulemaking
This final rule is published under authority of 49 U.S.C. 5103 and
5120 which, respectively:
1. Authorize the Secretary of Transportation to (a) designate
radioactive and other materials ``as hazardous when the Secretary
determines that transporting the material in commerce in a particular
amount and form may pose an unreasonable risk to health and safety or
[[Page 40605]]
property,'' and (b) ``prescribe regulations for the safe
transportation, including security, of hazardous material in
intrastate, interstate, and foreign commerce.''
2. Direct the Secretary to (a) ``participate in international
forums that establish or recommend mandatory standards and requirements
for transporting hazardous material in international commerce,'' and
(b) ``consult with interested authorities to ensure that, to the extent
practicable, regulations the Secretary prescribes . . . are consistent
with standards and requirements related to transporting hazardous
material that international authorities adopt,'' except that the
Secretary need not adopt an international standard or requirement which
``the Secretary decides. . .is unnecessary or unsafe,'' and the
Secretary may prescribe a more stringent safety standard or requirement
which the Secretary decides ``is necessary in the public interest.''
This final rule amends requirements in the HMR governing the
transportation of Class 7 (radioactive) materials in commerce to
maintain alignment with international standards by adopting recent
updates in TS-R-1, including changes to packaging requirements,
definitions, and activity limits.
Harmonization serves to facilitate international commerce; at the
same time, harmonization promotes the safety of people, property, and
the environment by reducing the potential for confusion and
misunderstanding that could result if shippers and transporters were
required to comply with two or more conflicting sets of regulatory
requirements. While the intent of this rulemaking is to align the HMR
with international standards, we review and consider each amendment on
its own merit based on its overall impact on transportation safety and
the economic implications associated with its adoption into the HMR.
Our goal is to harmonize without sacrificing the current HMR level of
safety and without imposing undue burdens on the regulated community.
Thus, as explained in the corresponding sections above, we are not
harmonizing with certain specific provisions of the TS-R-1. Moreover,
we are maintaining a number of current exceptions for domestic
transportation that should minimize the compliance burden on the
regulated community.
In developing this final rule PHMSA consulted with the NRC and the
U.S. Coast Guard.
B. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 and DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures
This rulemaking is not considered a significant regulatory action
under Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 (``Regulatory Planning and
Review''), as supplemented and reaffirmed by E.O. 13563 (``Improving
Regulation and Regulatory Review''), stressing that, to the extent
permitted by law, an agency rulemaking action must be based on benefits
that justify its costs, impose the least burden, consider cumulative
burdens, maximize benefits, use performance objectives, and assess
available alternatives, and the Regulatory Policies and Procedures of
the Department of Transportation (44 FR 11034).
During the rulemaking process, PHMSA considered three alternatives
to harmonize domestic and international radioactive materials
transportation requirements:
Alternative 1: Do nothing. The United States actively participates
in the development of uniform international standards for transporting
hazardous materials. Because all major countries and international
carrier organizations have or will adopt the changes proposed in this
rulemaking, a do-nothing approach would fail to adopt international
standards which enhance safety in the transportation of radioactive
materials and would result in complications in the movement of these
materials. Future inconsistencies with international transport
standards may result in foreign authorities refusing to accept
hazardous material shipments prepared in accordance with the HMR. To
successfully participate in international markets, U.S. companies would
be required to conform to dual regulations. Inconsistent domestic and
international regulations also have an adverse safety impact by making
it more difficult for shippers and carriers to understand and comply
with all applicable requirements. Unnecessary transportation delays may
also expose international shipments to additional safety and security
vulnerabilities. For these reasons, PHMSA did not adopt Alternative 1.
Alternative 2: Adopt the international standards in their entirety.
Under this alternative, all revisions to the IAEA regulations would be
incorporated into the HMR. In some instances PHMSA believes more
stringent regulations are necessary to enhance transportation safety,
and in others, less stringent regulations are necessary to reduce
economic burden. Because of certain safety and economic concerns PHMSA
elected not to propose adoption into the HMR of some amendments
incorporated into the IAEA regulations. In addition, PHMSA and the NRC
have identified changes that are only applicable domestically that
would increase safety, reduce costs, and improve compliance. For these
reasons, PHMSA did not adopt Alternative 2.
Alternative 3: Adopt IAEA regulations with additional changes to
the HMR that promise to enhance safety and decrease regulatory
compliance obstacles. Under this alternative, PHMSA is harmonizing the
HMR with the IAEA regulations and the NRC proposed amendments to an
extent consistent with U.S. safety and economic goals. As indicated
above, PHMSA is not adopting provisions that, in PHMSA's view, do not
provide an adequate level of safety. Further, PHMSA is providing for
exceptions and extended compliance periods to minimize the potential
economic impact of any revisions on the regulated community. PHMSA
provides detailed justification for each instance in the final rule
where the proposed change differs from the revised IAEA regulations.
Alternative 3 is the only alternative that addresses, in all respects,
the purpose of this regulatory action, which is to facilitate the safe
and efficient transportation of hazardous materials in international
commerce. For these reasons, Alternative 3 is PHMSA's chosen
alternative. A complete copy of the economic impact assessment for this
final rule is available in the docket for this rulemaking action PHMSA-
2009-0063 (HM-250).
C. Executive Order 13132
This final rule has been analyzed in accordance with the principles
and criteria contained in Executive Order 13132 (``Federalism''). This
final rule preempts State, local, and Indian tribe requirements but
does not impose any regulation that has substantial direct effects on
the States, the relationship between the national government and the
States, or the distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government. Therefore, the consultation and funding
requirements of Executive Order 13132 do not apply.
The Federal hazardous material transportation law, 49 U.S.C. 5101-
5128, contains an express preemption provision (49 U.S.C. 5125(b)) that
preempts State, local, and Indian tribe requirements on certain
subjects, as follows:
(1) The designation, description, and classification of hazardous
material;
(2) The packing, repacking, handling, labeling, marking, and
placarding of hazardous material;
[[Page 40606]]
(3) The preparation, execution, and use of shipping documents
related to hazardous material and requirements related to the number,
contents, and placement of those documents;
(4) The written notification, recording, and reporting of the
unintentional release in transportation of hazardous material; and
(5) The design, manufacture, fabrication, inspection, marking,
maintenance, recondition, repair, or testing of a packaging or
container represented, marked, certified, or sold as qualified for use
in transporting hazardous material in commerce.
This final rule addresses subject items (1), (2), (3), and (5)
above and preempts State, local, and Indian tribe requirements not
meeting the ``substantively the same'' standard. Federal hazardous
materials transportation law provides at 49 U.S.C. 5125(b)(2) that, if
DOT issues a regulation concerning any of the covered subjects, DOT
must determine and publish in the Federal Register the effective date
of Federal preemption. The effective date may not be earlier than the
90th day following the date of issuance of the final rule and not later
than two years after the date of issuance. The effective date of
Federal preemption is January 1, 2015.
D. Executive Order 13175
This final rule was analyzed in accordance with the principles and
criteria contained in Executive Order 13175 (``Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments''). PHMSA received two
comments concerning Executive Order 13175. PHMSA received a comment
from NIRS and CACC asking how we concluded that the proposed rule would
not uniquely impact communities of Indian Tribal leadership. PHMSA also
received a comment from the Alaska Inter-Tribal Council stating its
opposition to the assertion that our proposed rule does not
significantly or uniquely affect the communities of the Indian Tribal
governments. The Alaska Inter-Tribal Council states that international
shipping of radioactive materials is of great concern because of the
potential adverse risks to the Arctic territory and its inhabitants. It
further states that consultation between tribal governments and PHMSA
must occur before any changes to PHMSA rules that could potentially
adversely impact tribal communities, territories, peoples and
traditional ways of life.
This rule has the intended goal of harmonizing with international
standards for the safe transportation of radioactive materials, making
internally identified clarifications of requirements, and making
changes that enhance safety while shipments of radioactive materials
are in transportation. International and domestic shipments of
radioactive materials are already transiting arctic waters and Alaska
in compliance with the requirements of TS-R-1 or the HMR. The changes
adopted in this final rule are simply creating greater harmonization
with the international standard, and are not creating or authorizing
new hazardous materials shipments or transit routes. Furthermore,
consistency between U.S. and international regulations enhances the
safety of international hazardous materials transportation through
better understanding of the regulations, an increased level of industry
compliance, the smooth flow of hazardous materials from their points of
origin to their points of destination, and consistent emergency
response in the event of a hazardous materials incident. Based on this
information and the absence of specific indications to the contrary
from these commenters, the revisions adopted in this final rule do not
have direct tribal implications and do not impose substantial direct
compliance costs on Indian tribal governments; consequently 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
and has been developed in accordance with Executive Order 13272
(``Proper Consideration of Small Entities in Agency Rulemaking'') and
DOT's procedures and policies to promote compliance with the Regulatory
Flexibility Act to ensure that potential impacts of draft rules on
small entities are properly considered.
This final rule facilitates the transportation of hazardous
materials in international commerce by providing consistency with
international standards. This final rule applies to offerors and
carriers of hazardous materials, some of whom are small entities, such
as chemical manufacturers, users and suppliers, packaging
manufacturers, distributors, and training companies. As discussed in
the regulatory impact analysis, the majority of amendments in this
final rule should result in cost savings and ease the regulatory
compliance burden for shippers engaged in domestic and international
commerce, including trans-border shipments within North America.
Many companies will realize economic benefits as a result of these
amendments. Additionally, the changes effected by this final rule will
relieve U.S. companies, including small entities competing in foreign
markets, from the burden of complying with a dual system of
regulations. Therefore, we certify that these amendments will not have
a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. A complete copy of the regulatory flexibility analysis for
this final rule is available in the docket for this rulemaking action.
F. Paperwork Reduction Act
PHMSA currently has approved information collections under Office
of Management and Budget (OMB) Control Number 2137-0034, ``Hazardous
Materials Shipping Papers and Emergency Response Information,'' and OMB
Control Number 2137-0510, ``Radioactive Materials Transportation
Requirements.'' Specifically, this final rule will result in:
A decrease in the annual information collection burden of
OMB Control Number 2137-0034 due to reductions in the shipping paper
requirements for excepted quantities of RAM shipments. These reductions
in burden include not requiring the mass of these shipments on the
shipping papers for air shipments in Sec. 172.202(a)(6), the
additional description in Sec. 172.203(d) for RAM shipments, and not
requiring the shippers certification statement for RAM shipments in
Sec. 172.204(c)(4) and
an increase in the annual information collection burden of
OMB Control Number 2137-0510 due to an increase in the duration of
record keeping requirements in Sec. Sec. 173.411(c) and 173.415(a),
and the documentation required to demonstrate a package complies with
testing requirements in Sec. Sec. 173.415(a)(1) and (a)(2).
In response to comments received from multiple commenters we are
authorizing an option for alternative documentation to allow an offeror
who receives a packaging from another party acting as the manufacturer,
to rely on a manufacturer's certification when available. In such
instances, the offeror must maintain a copy of the manufacturer's
certification and, if requested by DOT, be able to obtain a copy of the
complete documentation from the manufacturer. These changes will not
result in an increase of respondents or responses, as the new
requirements are in addition to existing package documentation
requirements.
[[Page 40607]]
There will however be additional costs involved in the preparation and
retention of the documents in question. The manufacturer's
certification is an additional document, not previously provided for in
the HMR, but is merely an optional alternative to the existing package
documentation requirements.
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, no person is required to
respond to an information collection unless it has been approved by OMB
and displays a valid OMB control number. Section 1320.8(d), title 5,
Code of Federal Regulations requires that PHMSA provide interested
members of the public and affected agencies an opportunity to comment
on information and recordkeeping requests.
This rule identifies revised information collection requests that
PHMSA will submit to OMB for approval based on the requirements in this
final rule. PHMSA has developed burden estimates to reflect changes in
this final rule, and estimates the information collection and
recordkeeping burden in this rule to be as follows:
OMB Control Number 2137-0034
Annual Decrease in Number of Respondents: 10,000.
Annual Decrease in Annual Number of Responses: 100,000.
Annual Decrease in Annual Burden Hours: 140.
Annual Decrease in Annual Burden Costs: $5,912.
100,000 responses at 5 seconds a response equals 140 hours at
$42.23 an hour.
OMB Control Number 2137-0510.
Annual Increase in Number of Respondents: 0.
Annual Increase in Annual Number of Responses: 500.
Annual Increase in Annual Burden Hours: 6100.
Annual Increase in Annual Burden Costs: $394,731.
1400 modifications to existing responses at $64.71 an hour and four
hours per response and; 500 new certifications at $64.71 an hour and
one hour per response.
PHMSA will submit the revised information collection and
recordkeeping requirements to OMB for approval.
G. Regulation Identifier Number (RIN)
A regulation identifier number (RIN) is assigned to each regulatory
action listed in the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulations. The
Regulatory Information Service Center generally 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
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, adjusted for inflation, to either State, local,
or tribal governments, in the aggregate, or to the private sector in
any one year, and is the least burdensome alternative that achieves the
objective of the rule.
I. Environmental Assessment
The National Environmental Policy Act, 42 U.S.C. 4321-4375,
requires that Federal agencies analyze proposed actions to determine
whether the action will have a significant impact on the human
environment. In accordance with the Council on Environmental Quality
(CEQ) regulations, federal agencies must conduct an environmental
review considering (1) the need for the proposed action, (2)
alternatives to the proposed action, (3) probable environmental impacts
of the proposed action and alternatives, and (4) the agencies and
persons consulted during the consideration process. 40 CFR 1508.9(b).
1. Purpose and Need
PHMSA is amending requirements in the HMR pertaining to the
transportation of Class 7 (radioactive) materials to harmonize the HMR
with changes contained in the IAEA publication, entitled ``Regulations
for the Safe Transport of Radioactive Material, 2009 Edition, IAEA
Safety Standards Series No. TS-R-1,'' and making other amendments based
on PHMSA's own initiative. These amendments update, clarify, or provide
relief from certain existing regulatory requirements to promote safer
transportation practices, eliminate unnecessary regulatory
requirements, facilitate international commerce, and make these
requirements easier to understand.
2. Alternatives
In developing this rule, PHMSA considered three alternatives:
1. Do nothing;
2. Adopt the international standards in their entirety; or
3. Adopt IAEA regulations and DOT/NRC based changes that enhance
safety and decrease regulatory compliance obstacles.
Alternative 1:
Because our goal is to facilitate uniformity, compliance, commerce
and safety in the transportation of hazardous materials, we rejected
this alternative.
Alternative 2:
By adopting the international standards in their entirety, PHMSA
could potentially adopt provisions that, in our view, do not provide an
adequate level of transportation safety and environmental safety and
protection. Further, because we provide for domestic exceptions and
extended compliance periods to minimize the potential economic impact
of any revisions on the regulated community, this alternative was also
rejected.
Alternative 3 is PHMSA's selected alternative, because it is the
only alternative that addresses, in all respects, the purpose of this
regulatory action to facilitate the safe and efficient transportation
of hazardous materials in international commerce. Alternative 1 would
not facilitate uniformity, compliance, commerce and safety in the
transportation of hazardous materials. Alternative 2 includes, in some
instances, less stringent regulations than are necessary to enhance
transportation safety, and in other instances, more stringent
regulations which unnecessarily increase economic burdens. In addition,
PHMSA and the NRC have identified domestic-only changes that would
increase safety, reduce costs, and improve compliance.
3. Analysis of Environmental Impacts
Hazardous materials are transported by aircraft, vessel, rail, and
highway. The potential for environmental damage or contamination exists
when packages of Class 7 (radioactive) material are involved in
accidents or en route incidents resulting from cargo shifts, valve
failures, package failures, or loading, unloading, or handling
problems. The ecosystems that could be affected by a release include
air, water, soil, and ecological resources (for example, wildlife
habitats), as well as human exposure. The adverse environmental impacts
associated with releases of most hazardous materials are short-term
impacts that can be greatly reduced or eliminated through prompt clean-
up of the accident scene. Most Class 7 (radioactive) materials are not
transported in quantities sufficient to cause significant, long-term
environmental damage if they are released, and those that have the
potential to significantly impact human life or the environment must
meet strict packaging and handling standards to ensure that even under
accident conditions the hazardous material
[[Page 40608]]
would not be released into the environment.
The hazardous material regulatory system is a risk management
system that is prevention-oriented and focused on identifying a hazard
and reducing the probability and quantity of a hazardous material
release. Making the regulatory provisions in the HMR clearer and more
consistent with international standards will promote compliance and
facilitate efficient transportation, thereby enhancing the safe
transportation of hazardous materials and the protection of the
environment. Relaxing certain regulatory requirements is based on
PHMSA's experience, review, and conclusion that the changes are safe.
PHMSA certifies that the amendments proposed in this final rule will
not have a significant impact on the environment. In this final rule
PHMSA is adopting the following noteworthy amendments to the HMR:
Placarding of conveyances.
In this final rule PHMSA is requiring placards to be affixed to
conveyances carrying fissile material packages, unpackaged low specific
activity (LSA) material or surface contaminated objects (SCO) in
category I (i.e., LSA-I and SCO-I respectively), all conveyances
required by Sec. Sec. 173.427 and 173.441 to operate under exclusive
use conditions, and all closed vehicles used in accordance with Sec.
173.443(d). PHMSA expects a modest positive environmental impact due to
awareness provided to transport personnel that shipments contain modest
amounts of radioactivity, as well as a slight reduction in exposure to
transportation personnel. The modest gains would not be achieved under
alternative one or two.
Extension of package documentation retention requirement and
clarification of information required to be maintained.
New clarification on types of information required to be retained
for certain packages used to ship radioactive materials is provided in
this final rule. PHMSA expects modest positive environmental gains due
to a projected increase in appropriately tested and constructed
packages, which will lead to a decrease in exposure to released
radioactivity. As this change is a result an internal PHMSA review of
existing domestic regulations, these modest environmental gains would
not be achieved by selecting alternatives one or two.
Requirements for leaking or suspected leaking packages of
radioactive material, or conveyance carrying leaking or suspected
leaking unpackaged radioactive material.
PHMSA is adding new required actions for leaking or suspect Class 7
(radioactive) packages or unpackaged material, which include; immediate
actions and assessments, protective requirements, recovery techniques,
and prerequisites for continued transport. PHMSA expects modest
positive environmental impact from this requirement. Increased clarity
on responsibilities and actions to be taken when a leaking radioactive
package is discovered are expected to reduce exposure to transportation
workers and the general public. Any environmental gains from this
change would be realized under alternatives two or three.
Contamination.
PHMSA is adding new as well as clarifying pre- and post-shipment
requirements for Class 7 (radioactive) transport regarding external
contamination of radioactive substances. PHMSA expects a modest
positive environmental impact from this rulemaking. The increased
clarity on responsibilities and actions to be taken before and after
transportation will benefit the environment, workers, emergency
responders, and the general public by minimizing the possibility of the
unintended spread of radioactive contamination during routine
conditions of transport. As this change is a result an internal PHMSA
review of existing domestic regulations, these modest environmental
gains would not be achieved by selecting alternatives one or two.
4. Agency Consultation and Finding of No Significant Impact
PHMSA, in consultation with the NRC, certifies that the amendments
in this final rule will not have a significant impact on the
environment.
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 comments (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.
K. Executive Order 13609 and International Trade Analysis
Under Executive Order 13609 (``Promoting International Regulatory
Cooperation''), agencies must consider whether the impacts associated
with significant variations between domestic and international
regulatory approaches are unnecessary or may impair the ability of
American businesses to export and compete internationally. In meeting
shared challenges involving health, safety, labor, security,
environmental, and other issues, international regulatory cooperation
can identify approaches that are at least as protective as those that
are or would be adopted in the absence of such cooperation.
International regulatory cooperation can also reduce, eliminate, or
prevent unnecessary differences in regulatory requirements.
Similarly, the Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (Pub. L. 96-39), as
amended by the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (Pub. L. 103-465),
prohibits Federal agencies from establishing any standards or engaging
in related activities that create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign
commerce of the United States. For purposes of these requirements,
Federal agencies may participate in the establishment of international
standards, so long as the standards have a legitimate domestic
objective, such as providing for safety, and do not operate to exclude
imports that meet this objective. The statute also requires
consideration of international standards and, where appropriate, that
they be the basis for U.S. standards.
PHMSA participates in the establishment of international standards
to protect the safety of the American public, and we have assessed the
effects of this final rule to ensure that it does not cause unnecessary
obstacles to foreign trade. In fact, the rule is designed to facilitate
international trade. Accordingly, this rulemaking is consistent with
Executive Order13609 and PHMSA's obligations under the Trade Agreement
Act, as amended.
List of Subjects
49 CFR Part 171
Exports, Hazardous materials transportation, Hazardous waste,
Imports, Incorporation by reference, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
49 CFR Part 172
Education, Hazardous materials transportation, Hazardous waste,
Incorporation by reference, Labeling, Markings, Packaging and
containers, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
49 CFR Part 173
Hazardous materials transportation, Incorporation by reference,
Packaging and containers, Radioactive materials,
[[Page 40609]]
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Uranium.
49 CFR Part 174
Hazardous materials transportation, Radioactive materials, Railroad
safety.
49 CFR Part 175
Air carriers, Hazardous materials transportation, Incorporation by
reference, Radioactive materials, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
49 CFR Part 176
Hazardous materials transportation, Incorporation by reference,
Maritime carriers, Radioactive materials, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
49 CFR Part 177
Hazardous materials transportation, Motor carriers, Radioactive
materials, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
49 CFR Part 178
Hazardous materials transportation, Incorporation by reference,
Motor vehicle safety, Packaging and containers, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
In consideration of the foregoing, 49 CFR Chapter I is amended as
follows:
PART 171--GENERAL INFORMATION, REGULATIONS, AND DEFINITIONS
0
1. The authority citation for part 171 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101-5128, 44701; Pub. L. 101-410 section 4
(28 U.S.C. 2461 note); Pub. L. 104-134, section 31001; 49 CFR 1.81
and 1.97.
0
2. Amend Sec. 171.7 by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (a)(1);
0
b. Removing paragraph (d)(2) and redesignating paragraphs (d)(3)
through (8) as (d)(2) through (7) respectively;
0
c. Removing paragraph (i);
0
d. Removing paragraph (p);
0
e. Removing paragraph (ee);
0
f. Redesignating paragraphs (j) through (o) as (i) through (m)
respectively;
0
g. Redesignating paragraphs (q) through (dd) as (n) through (bb)
respectively; and
0
h. Revising newly designated paragraphs (q)(1) and (u)(9) as follows:
Sec. 171.7 Reference material.
(a) * * *
(1) General. There is incorporated, by reference in parts 171-180
of this subchapter, matter referred to that is not specifically set
forth. This matter is hereby made a part of the regulations in parts
171-180 of this subchapter. The matter subject to change is
incorporated only as it is in effect on the date of issuance of the
regulation referring to that matter. The material listed in paragraphs
(b) through (bb) of this section has been approved for incorporation by
reference by the Director of the Federal Register in accordance with 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Material is incorporated as it exists
on the date of the approval and a notice of any change in the material
will be published in the Federal Register. Matters referenced by
footnote are included as part of the regulations of this subchapter.
* * * * *
(q) * * *
(1) No. TS-R-1, IAEA Safety Standards for Protecting People and the
Environment; Regulations for the Safe Transport of Radioactive
Material, (IAEA Regulations), 2009 Edition, into Sec. Sec. 171.22;
171.23; 171.26, 173.415, 173.416, 173.417, 173.473.
* * * * *
(u) * * *
(9) ISO 2919:1999(E), Radiation Protection--Sealed radioactive
sources--General requirements and classification, (ISO 2919), second
edition, February 15, 1999, into Sec. 173.469.
* * * * *
PART 172--HAZARDOUS MATERIALS TABLE, SPECIAL PROVISIONS, HAZARDOUS
MATERIALS COMMUNICATIONS, EMERGENCY RESPONSE INFORMATION, TRAINING
REQUIREMENTS, AND SECURITY PLANS
0
3. The authority citation for part 172 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101-5128, 44701; 49 CFR 1.81, 1.96 and
1.97.
0
4. In Sec. 172.203, paragraphs (d)(2), (d)(3), and (d)(4) are revised
to read as follows:
Sec. 172.203 Additional description requirements.
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(2) A description of the physical and chemical form of the
material:
(i) For special form materials, the words ``special form'' unless
the words ``special form'' already appear in the proper shipping name;
or
(ii) If the material is not in special form, a description of the
physical and chemical form of the material (generic chemical
descriptions are permitted).
(3) The maximum activity of the radioactive contents contained in
each package during transport in terms of the appropriate SI units
(e.g., Becquerels (Bq), Terabecquerels (TBq)). The activity may also be
stated in appropriate customary units (e.g., Curies (Ci), milliCuries
(mCi), microCuries (uCi)) in parentheses following the SI units.
Abbreviations are authorized. Except for plutonium-239 and plutonium-
241, the weight in grams or kilograms of fissile radionuclides (or the
mass of each fissile nuclide for mixtures when appropriate) may be
inserted instead of activity units. For plutonium-239 and plutonium-
241, the weight in grams of fissile radionuclides (or the mass of each
fissile nuclide for mixtures when appropriate) may be inserted in
addition to the activity units.
(4) The category of label applied to each package in the shipment.
For example: ``RADIOACTIVE WHITE-I,'' or ``WHITE-I.''
* * * * *
0
5. In Sec. 172.310, paragraph (b) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 172.310 Class 7 (radioactive) materials.
* * * * *
(b) Each industrial, Type A, Type B(U), or Type B(M) package must
be legibly and durably marked on the outside of the packaging, in
letters at least 12 mm (0.47 in) high, with the words ``TYPE IP-1,''
``TYPE IP-2,'' ``TYPE IP-3,'' ``TYPE A,'' ``TYPE B(U)'' or ``TYPE
B(M),'' as appropriate. A package which does not conform to Type IP-1,
Type IP-2, Type IP-3, Type A, Type B(U) or Type B(M) requirements may
not be so marked.
* * * * *
0
6. In Sec. 172.402, paragraph (d)(1) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 172.402 Additional labeling requirements.
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(1) A subsidiary label is not required for a package containing
material that satisfies all of the criteria in Sec. 173.4, Sec.
173.4a, or Sec. 173.4b applicable to the subsidiary hazard class.
* * * * *
0
7. In Sec. 172.403, paragraphs (d) and (g)(2) are revised to read as
follows:
Sec. 172.403 Class 7 (radioactive) material.
* * * * *
(d) EMPTY label. See Sec. 173.428(e) of this subchapter for EMPTY
labeling requirements.
* * * * *
(g) * * *
(2) Activity. The maximum activity of the radioactive contents in
the package during transport must be expressed in
[[Page 40610]]
appropriate SI units (e.g., Becquerels (Bq), Terabecquerels (TBq)). The
activity may also be stated in appropriate customary units (e.g.,
Curies (Ci), milliCuries (mCi), microCuries (uCi)) in parentheses
following the SI units. Abbreviations are authorized. Except for
plutonium-239 and plutonium-241, the weight in grams or kilograms of
fissile radionuclides (or the mass of each fissile nuclide for mixtures
when appropriate) may be inserted instead of activity units. For
plutonium-239 and plutonium-241, the weight in grams of fissile
radionuclides (or the mass of each fissile nuclide for mixtures when
appropriate) may be inserted in addition to the activity units.
* * * * *
0
8. In Sec. 172.504, paragraph (e), footnote 1 to Table 1 is revised to
read as follows:
Sec. 172.504 General placarding requirements.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
\1\ RADIOACTIVE placards are also required for: All shipments of
unpackaged LSA-I material or SCO-I; all shipments required by
Sec. Sec. 173.427, 173.441, and 173.457 of this subchapter to be
operated under exclusive use; and all closed vehicles used in
accordance with Sec. 173.443(d).
* * * * *
0
9. In Sec. 172.505, paragraph (b) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 172.505 Placarding for subsidiary hazards.
* * * * *
(b) In addition to the RADIOACTIVE placard which may be required by
Sec. 172.504(e) of this subpart, each transport vehicle, portable tank
or freight container that contains 454 kg (1,001 pounds) or more gross
weight of non-fissile, fissile-excepted, or fissile uranium
hexafluoride must be placarded with a CORROSIVE placard on each side
and each end.
* * * * *
PART 173--SHIPPERS--GENERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR SHIPMENTS AND
PACKAGINGS
0
10. The authority citation for part 173 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101-5128, 44701; 49 CFR 1.81, 1.96 and
1.97.
0
11. In Sec. 173.4, paragraph (a)(1)(iv) is removed and reserved, and
paragraph (b) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 173.4 Small quantities for highway and rail.
(a) * * *
(1) * * *
(iv) [Reserved]
* * * * *
(b) A package containing a Class 7 (radioactive) material also must
conform to the requirements of Sec. 173.421(a)(1) through (a)(5),
Sec. 173.424(a) through (g), or Sec. 173.426(a) through (c) as
applicable.
* * * * *
0
12. In Sec. 173.25, paragraph (a)(4) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 173.25 Authorized packagings and overpacks.
(a) * * *
(4) The overpack is marked with the word ``OVERPACK'' when
specification packagings are required, or for Class 7 (radioactive)
material when a Type A, Type B(U), Type B(M) or industrial package is
required. The ``OVERPACK'' marking is not required when the required
markings representative of each package type contained in the overpack
are visible from the outside of the overpack.
* * * * *
0
13. In Sec. 173.401, paragraph (b)(4) is revised and a new paragraph
(b)(5) is added to read as follows:
Sec. 173.401 Scope.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(4) Natural material and ores containing naturally occurring
radionuclides which are either in their natural state, or which have
only been processed for purposes other than for extraction of the
radionuclides, and which are not intended to be processed for the use
of these radionuclides, provided the activity concentration of the
material does not exceed 10 times the exempt material activity
concentration values specified in Sec. 173.436, or determined in
accordance with the requirements of Sec. 173.433.
(5) Non-radioactive solid objects with radioactive substances
present on any surfaces in quantities not exceeding the threshold
limits set forth in the definition of contamination in Sec. 173.403.
0
14. Section 173.403 is amended as follows:
0
a. The definitions of ``contamination,'' ``criticality safety index
(CSI),'' ``fissile material,'' ``low specific activity (LSA)
material,'' ``radiation level,'' and ``uranium'' are revised.
0
b. In the definition of ``package,'' paragraphs (2)(i), (2)(ii), and
(2)(iii) are revised to read as follows:
Sec. 173.403 Definitions.
* * * * *
Contamination means the presence of a radioactive substance on a
surface in quantities in excess of 0.4 Bq/cm\2\ for beta and gamma
emitters and low toxicity alpha emitters or 0.04 Bq/cm\2\ for all other
alpha emitters. There are two categories of contamination:
(1) Fixed contamination means contamination that cannot be removed
from a surface during normal conditions of transport.
(2) Non-fixed contamination means contamination that can be removed
from a surface during normal conditions of transport.
* * * * *
Criticality Safety Index (CSI) means a number (rounded up to the
next tenth) which is used to provide control over the accumulation of
packages, overpacks or freight containers containing fissile material.
The CSI for a package containing fissile material is determined in
accordance with the instructions provided in 10 CFR 71.22, 71.23, and
71.59. The CSI for an overpack, freight container, consignment or
conveyance containing fissile material packages is the arithmetic sum
of the criticality safety indices of all the fissile material packages
contained within the overpack, freight container, consignment or
conveyance.
* * * * *
Fissile material means plutonium-239, plutonium-241, uranium-233,
uranium-235, or any combination of these radionuclides. Fissile
material means the fissile nuclides themselves, not material containing
fissile nuclides, but does not include: Unirradiated natural uranium or
depleted uranium; and natural uranium or depleted uranium that has been
irradiated in thermal reactors only. Certain exceptions for fissile
materials are provided in Sec. 173.453.
* * * * *
Low Specific Activity (LSA) material means Class 7 (radioactive)
material with limited specific activity which is not fissile material
or is excepted under Sec. 173.453, and which satisfies the
descriptions and limits set forth below. Shielding material surrounding
the LSA material may not be considered in determining the estimated
average specific activity of the LSA material. LSA material must be in
one of three groups:
(1) LSA-I:
(i) Uranium and thorium ores, concentrates of uranium and thorium
ores, and other ores containing naturally occurring radionuclides which
are intended to be processed for the use of these radionuclides; or
(ii) Natural uranium, depleted uranium, natural thorium or their
[[Page 40611]]
compounds or mixtures, provided they are unirradiated and in solid or
liquid form; or
(iii) Radioactive material for which the A2 value is
unlimited; or
(iv) Other radioactive material in which the activity is
distributed throughout and the estimated average specific activity does
not exceed 30 times the values for activity concentration specified in
Sec. 173.436 or calculated in accordance with Sec. 173.433, or 30
times the default values listed in Table 8 of Sec. 173.433.
(2) LSA-II:
(i) Water with tritium concentration up to 0.8 TBq/L (20.0 Ci/L);
or
(ii) Other radioactive material in which the activity is
distributed throughout and the average specific activity does not
exceed 10-4 A2/g for solids and gases, and
10-5 A2/g for liquids.
(3) LSA-III. Solids (e.g., consolidated wastes, activated
materials), excluding powders, that meet the requirements of Sec.
173.468 and in which:
(i) The radioactive material is distributed throughout a solid or a
collection of solid objects, or is essentially uniformly distributed in
a solid compact binding agent (such as concrete, bitumen, ceramic,
etc.);
(ii) The radioactive material is relatively insoluble, or it is
intrinsically contained in a relatively insoluble material, so that,
even under loss of packaging, the loss of Class 7 (radioactive)
material per package by leaching when placed in water for seven days
would not exceed 0.1 A2; and
(iii) The estimated average specific activity of the solid,
excluding any shielding material, does not exceed 2 x 10-3
A2/g.
* * * * *
Package * * *
(1) * * *
(2) * * *
(i) ``Industrial package Type 1 (Type IP-1);
(ii) ``Industrial package Type 2 (Type IP-2); or
(iii) ``Industrial package Type 3 (Type IP-3).
* * * * *
Radiation level means the radiation dose-equivalent rate expressed
in millisieverts per hour or mSv/h (millirems per hour or mrem/h). It
consists of the sum of the dose-equivalent rates from all types of
ionizing radiation present including alpha, beta, gamma, and neutron
radiation. Neutron flux densities may be used to determine neutron
radiation levels according to Table 1:
Table 1--Neutron Fluence Rates To Be Regarded as Equivalent to a
Radiation Level of 0.01 mSv/h (1mrem/h) \1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flux density
equivalent to
0.01 mSv/h (1
mrem/h)
Energy of neutron neutrons per
square
centimeter per
second (n/
cm\2\/s)\1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thermal (2.5 10E-8) MeV................................ 272.0
1 keV.................................................. 272.0
10 keV................................................. 281.0
100 keV................................................ 47.0
500 keV................................................ 11.0
1 MeV.................................................. 7.5
5 MeV.................................................. 6.4
10 MeV................................................. 6.7
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Flux densities equivalent for energies between those listed in this
table may be obtained by linear interpolation.
* * * * *
Uranium--natural, depleted or enriched means the following:
(1)(i) ``Natural uranium'' means uranium (which may be chemically
separated) containing the naturally occurring distribution of uranium
isotopes (approximately 99.28% uranium-238 and 0.72% uranium-235 by
mass).
(ii) ``Depleted uranium'' means uranium containing a lesser mass
percentage of uranium-235 than in natural uranium.
(iii) ``Enriched uranium'' means uranium containing a greater mass
percentage of uranium-235 than 0.72%.
(2) For each of these definitions, a very small mass percentage of
uranium-234 may be present.
* * * * *
0
15. In Sec. 173.410, paragraph (i)(3) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 173.410 General design requirements.
* * * * *
(i) * * *
(3) A package containing liquid contents must be capable of
withstanding, without leakage, an internal pressure that produces a
pressure differential of not less than the maximum normal operating
pressure plus 95 kPa (13.8 psi).
0
16. Section 173.411 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 173.411 Industrial packages.
(a) General. Each industrial package must comply with the
requirements of this section which specifies package tests, and record
retention applicable to Industrial Package Type 1 (Type IP-1),
Industrial Package Type 2 (Type IP-2), and Industrial Package Type 3
(Type IP-3).
(b) Industrial package certification and tests. (1) Each Type IP-1
package must meet the general design requirements prescribed in Sec.
173.410.
(2) Each Type IP-2 package must meet the general design
requirements prescribed in Sec. 173.410 and when subjected to the
tests specified in Sec. 173.465(c) and (d) or evaluated against these
tests by any of the methods authorized by Sec. 173.461(a), must
prevent:
(i) Loss or dispersal of the radioactive contents; and
(ii) A significant increase in the radiation levels recorded or
calculated at the external surfaces for the condition before the test.
(3) Each Type IP-3 package must meet the requirements for Type IP-1
and Type IP-2 packages, and must meet the requirements specified in
Sec. 173.412(a) through (j).
(4) A portable tank may be used as a Type IP-2 or Type IP-3 package
provided that:
(i) It meets the requirements for Type IP-1 packages specified in
paragraph (b)(1);
(ii) It meets the requirements prescribed in Chapter 6.7 of the
United Nations Recommendations on the Transport of Dangerous Goods,
(IBR, see Sec. 171.7 of this subchapter), ``Requirements for the
Design, Construction, Inspection and Testing of Portable Tanks and
Multiple-Element Gas Containers (MEGCs),'' or other requirements at
least equivalent to those standards;
(iii) It is capable of withstanding a test pressure of 265 kPa
(38.4 psia); and
(iv) It is designed so that any additional shielding which is
provided must be capable of withstanding the static and dynamic
stresses resulting from handling and routine conditions of transport
and of preventing more than a 20% increase in the maximum radiation
level at any external surface of the portable tanks.
(5) A cargo tank or a tank car may be used as Type IP-2 or Type IP-
3 package for transporting LSA-I and LSA-II liquids and gases as
prescribed in Table 6 of Sec. 173.427, provided that:
(i) It meets the requirements for a Type IP-1 package specified in
paragraph (b)(1);
(ii) It is capable of withstanding a test pressure of 265 kPa (38.4
psia); and
(iii) It is designed so that any additional shielding which is
provided must be capable of withstanding the static and dynamic
stresses resulting from handling and routine conditions of transport
and of preventing more than a
[[Page 40612]]
20% increase in the maximum radiation level at any external surface of
the tanks.
(6) A freight container may be used as Type IP-2 or Type IP-3
packages provided:
(i) The radioactive contents are restricted to solid materials;
(ii) It meets the requirements for a Type IP-1 packages specified
in paragraph (b)(1); and
(iii) It meets the standards prescribed in the International
Organization for Standardization document ISO 1496-1: ``Series 1
Freight Containers--Specifications and Testing--Part 1: General Cargo
Containers; excluding dimensions and ratings (IBR, see Sec. 171.7 of
this subchapter). It must be designed such that if subjected to the
tests prescribed in that document and the accelerations occurring
during routine conditions of transport it would prevent:
(A) Loss or dispersal of the radioactive contents; and
(B) More than a 20% increase in the maximum radiation level at any
external surface of the freight containers.
(7) A metal intermediate bulk containers may be used as a Type IP-2
or Type IP-3 package, provided:
(i) It meets the requirements for a Type IP-1 package specified in
paragraph (b)(1); and
(ii) It meets the requirements prescribed in Chapter 6.5 of the
United Nations Recommendations on the Transport of Dangerous Goods,
(IBR, see Sec. 171.7 of this subchapter), ``Requirements for the
Construction and Testing of Intermediate Bulk Containers,'' for Packing
Group I or II, and if subjected to the tests prescribed in that
document, but with the drop test conducted in the most damaging
orientation, it would prevent:
(A) Loss or dispersal of the radioactive contents; and
(B) More than a 20% increase in the maximum radiation level at any
external surface of the intermediate bulk container.
(c) Except for Type IP-1 packages, each offeror of an industrial
package must maintain on file for at least two years after the
offeror's latest shipment, and must provide to the Associate
Administrator on request, complete documentation of tests and an
engineering evaluation or comparative data showing that the
construction methods, package design, and materials of construction
comply with that specification.
0
17. In Sec. 173.412, paragraphs (f) and (k)(3)(ii) are revised to read
as follows:
Sec. 173.412 Additional design requirements for Type A packages.
* * * * *
(f) The containment system will retain its radioactive contents
under the reduction of ambient pressure to 60 kPa (8.7 psia).
* * * * *
(k) * * *
(3) * * *
(ii) Have a containment system composed of primary inner and
secondary outer containment components designed to enclose the liquid
contents completely and ensure retention of the liquid within the
secondary outer component in the event that the primary inner component
leaks.
* * * * *
0
18. In Sec. 173.415, paragraph (a) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 173.415 Authorized Type A packages.
* * * * *
(a) DOT Specification 7A (see Sec. 178.350 of this subchapter)
Type A general packaging. Until January 1, 2017 each offeror of a
Specification 7A package must maintain on file for at least one year
after the latest shipment, and shall provide to DOT on request,
complete documentation of tests and an engineering evaluation or
comparative data showing that the construction methods, packaging
design, and materials of construction comply with that specification.
After January 1, 2017 each offeror of a Specification 7A package must
maintain on file for at least two years after the offeror's latest
shipment, and shall provide to DOT on request, one of the following:
(1) A description of the package showing materials of construction,
dimensions, weight, closure and closure materials (including gaskets,
tape, etc.) of each item of the containment system, shielding and
packing materials used in normal transportation, and the following:
(i) If the packaging is subjected to the physical tests of Sec.
173.465, and if applicable, Sec. 173.466, documentation of testing,
including date, place of test, signature of testers, a detailed
description of each test performed including equipment used, and the
damage to each item of the containment system resulting from the tests,
or
(ii) For any other demonstration of compliance with tests
authorized in Sec. 173.461, a detailed analysis which shows that, for
the contents being shipped, the package meets the pertinent design and
performance requirements for a DOT 7A Type A specification package.
(2) If the offeror has obtained the packaging from another person
who meets the definition of ``packaging manufacturer'' in Sec.
178.350(c) of this subchapter, a certification from the packaging
manufacturer that the package meets all the requirements of Sec.
178.350 for the radioactive contents presented for transport and a copy
of documents maintained by the packaging manufacturer that meet the
requirements of paragraph (a)(1) of this section.
* * * * *
0
19. In Sec. 173.416, paragraph (c) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 173.416 Authorized Type B packages.
* * * * *
(c) A package approved by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
under a special package authorization granted in accordance with 10 CFR
71.41(d) provided it is offered only for domestic transportation in
accordance with the requirements in Sec. 173.471(b) and (c).
0
20. Section 173.417 is amended as follows:
0
a. Paragraphs (a)(3) and(b)(3) are removed;
0
b Table 3 is removed; and
0
c. Paragraph (c) is revised to read as follow:
Sec. 173.417 Authorized fissile materials packages.
* * * * *
(c) A package approved by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
under a special package authorization granted in accordance with 10 CFR
71.41(d) provided it is offered only for domestic transportation in
accordance with the requirements in Sec. 173.471(b) and (c).
0
21. In Sec. 173.420, paragraph (a)(2)(ii) is removed and reserved,
paragraphs (a)(3)(i) and (a)(6) are revised, and a new paragraph (e) is
added to read as follows:
Sec. 173.420 Uranium hexafluoride (fissile, fissile excepted and non-
fissile).
(a) * * *
(2) * * *
(ii) [Reserved]
* * * * *
(3) * * *
(i) withstand a hydraulic test at an internal pressure of at least
1.4 MPa (200 psig) without leakage;
* * * * *
(6) The pressure in the package at 20 [deg]C (68[emsp14][deg]F)
must be less than 101.3 kPa (14.7 psia).
* * * * *
(e) For a package containing 0.1 kg or more of UF6, the
proper shipping name and UN number ``Radioactive material, uranium
hexafluoride, UN 2978'' must be used for the transportation of non-
[[Page 40613]]
fissile or fissile-excepted uranium hexafluoride and the proper
shipping name and UN number ``Radioactive material, uranium
hexafluoride, fissile, UN 2977'' must be used for the transport of
fissile uranium hexafluoride.
0
22. Section 173.421 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 173.421 Excepted packages for limited quantities of Class 7
(radioactive) materials.
A Class 7 (radioactive) material with an activity per package which
does not exceed the limited quantity package limits specified in Table
4 in Sec. 173.425, and its packaging, are excepted from requirements
in this subchapter for specification packaging, marking (except for the
UN identification number marking requirement described in Sec.
173.422(a)), labeling, and if not a hazardous substance or hazardous
waste, shipping papers, and the requirements of this subpart if:
(a) Each package meets the general design requirements of Sec.
173.410;
(b) The radiation level at any point on the external surface of the
package does not exceed 0.005 mSv/h (0.5 mrem/h);
(c) The non-fixed contamination on the external surface of the
package does not exceed the limits specified in Sec. 173.443(a);
(d) The outside of the inner packaging or, if there is no inner
packaging, the outside of the packaging itself bears the marking
``Radioactive;''
(e) The package does not contain fissile material unless excepted
by Sec. 173.453; and
(f) The material is otherwise prepared for shipment as specified in
accordance with Sec. 173.422.
0
23. In Sec. 173.422, the introductory text and paragraphs (a) and (e)
are revised to read as follows:
Sec. 173.422 Additional requirements for excepted packages containing
Class 7 (radioactive) materials.
An excepted package of Class 7 (radioactive) material that is
prepared for shipment under the provisions of Sec. 173.421, Sec.
173.424, Sec. 173.426, or Sec. 173.428, or a small quantity of
another hazard class transported by highway or rail (as defined in
Sec. 173.4) which also meets the requirements of one of these
sections, is not subject to any additional requirements of this
subchapter, except for the following:
(a) The outside of each package must be marked with:
(1) The UN identification number for the material preceded by the
letters UN, as shown in column (4) of the Hazardous Materials Table in
Sec. 172.101 of this subchapter; and
(2) The letters ``RQ'' on a non-bulk packaging containing a
hazardous substance.
* * * * *
(e) For a material that meets the definition of a hazardous
substance or a hazardous waste, the shipping paper requirements of
subpart C of part 172 of this subchapter, except that such shipments
are not subject to shipping paper requirements applicable to Class 7
(radioactive) materials in Sec. Sec. 172.202(a)(5), 172.202(a)(6),
172.203(d) and 172.204(c)(4).
0
24. Section 173.427 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 173.427 Transport requirements for low specific activity (LSA)
Class 7 (radioactive) material and surface contaminated objects (SCO).
(a) In addition to other applicable requirements specified in this
subchapter, LSA material and SCO must be transported in accordance with
the following conditions:
(1) The external dose rate may not exceed an external radiation
level of 10 mSv/h (1 rem/h) at 3 m (10 feet) from the unshielded
material;
(2) The quantity of LSA material and SCO transported in any single
conveyance may not exceed the limits specified in Table 5;
(3) LSA material and SCO that are or contain fissile material must
conform to the applicable requirements of Sec. 173.453;
(4) Packaged and unpackaged Class 7 (radioactive) materials must
conform to the contamination control limits specified in Sec. 173.443;
(5) External radiation levels may not exceed those specified in
Sec. 173.441; and
(6) For LSA material and SCO consigned as exclusive use:
(i) Shipments must be loaded by the consignor and unloaded by the
consignee from the conveyance or freight container in which originally
loaded;
(ii) There may be no loose radioactive material in the conveyance;
however, when the conveyance is the packaging, there may not be any
leakage of radioactive material from the conveyance;
(iii) Packaged and unpackaged Class 7 (radioactive) material must
be braced so as to prevent shifting of lading under conditions normally
incident to transportation;
(iv) Specific instructions for maintenance of exclusive use
shipment controls shall be provided by the offeror to the carrier. Such
instructions must be included with the shipping paper information;
(v) The shipment must be placarded in accordance with subpart F of
part 172 of this subchapter;
(vi) For domestic transportation only, packaged and unpackaged
Class 7 (radioactive) material containing less than an A2
quantity are excepted from the marking and labeling requirements of
this subchapter, other than the subsidiary hazard labeling required in
172.402(d). However, the exterior of each package or unpackaged Class 7
(radioactive) material must be stenciled or otherwise marked
``RADIOACTIVE--LSA'' or ``RADIOACTIVE--SCO'', as appropriate, and
packages or unpackaged Class 7 (radioactive) material that contain a
hazardous substance must be stenciled or otherwise marked with the
letters ``RQ'' in association with the description in this paragraph
(a)(6)(vi); and
(vii) Transportation by aircraft is prohibited except when
transported in an industrial package in accordance with Table 6 of this
section, or in an authorized Type A or Type B package.
(b) Except as provided in paragraph (c) or (d) of this section, LSA
material and SCO must be packaged as follows:
(1) In an industrial package (Type IP-1, Type IP-2 or Type IP-3;
Sec. 173.411), subject to the limitations of Table 6;
(2) In a DOT Specification 7A (Sec. 178.350 of this subchapter)
Type A package;
(3) In any Type B(U) or B(M) packaging authorized pursuant to Sec.
173.416;
(4) For domestic transportation of an exclusive use shipment that
is less than an A2 quantity, in a packaging which meets the
requirements of Sec. 173.410; or
(5) In portable tanks, cargo tanks and tank cars, as provided in
Sec. Sec. 173.411(b)(4) and (5), respectively.
(c) LSA-I material and SCO-I may be transported unpackaged under
the following conditions:
(1) All unpackaged material, other than ores containing only
naturally occurring radionuclides, must be transported in such a manner
that under routine conditions of transport there will be no escape of
the radioactive contents from the conveyance nor will there be any loss
of shielding;
(2) Each conveyance must be under exclusive use, except when only
transporting SCO-I on which the contamination on the accessible and the
inaccessible surfaces is not greater than 4.0 Bq/cm\2\ for beta and
gamma emitters and low toxicity alpha emitters and 0.4 Bq/cm\2\ for all
other alpha emitters;
(3) For SCO-I where it is reasonable to suspect that non-fixed
contamination may exist on inaccessible surfaces in excess of the
values specified in
[[Page 40614]]
paragraph (c)(2) of this section, measures shall be taken to ensure
that the radioactive material is not released into the conveyance or to
the environment; and
(4) The highway or rail conveyance must be placarded in accordance
with subpart F of part 172 of this subchapter.
(d) LSA material and SCO that exceed the packaging limits in this
section must be packaged in accordance with 10 CFR part 71.
(e) Tables 5 and 6 are as follows:
Table 5--Conveyance Activity Limits for LSA Material and SCO
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Activity limit for
Nature of material conveyances other than by Activity limit for hold or compartment
inland waterway of an inland waterway conveyance
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. LSA-I................................. No limit.................... No limit.
2. LSA-II and LSA-III; Non-combustible No limit.................... 100 A[ihel2].
solids.
3. LSA-II and LSA-III; Combustible solids 100 A[ihel2]................ 10 A[ihel2].
and all liquids and gases.
4. SCO................................... 100 A[ihel2]................ 10 A[ihel2].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 6--Industrial Package Integrity Requirements for LSA Material and SCO
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industrial packaging type
Contents ----------------------------------------------------------------------
Exclusive use shipment Non exclusive use shipment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. LSA-I:
Solid................................ Type IP-1................... Type IP-1.
Liquid............................... Type IP-1................... Type IP-2.
2. LSA-II:
Solid................................ Type IP-2................... Type IP-2.
Liquid and gas....................... Type IP-2................... Type IP-3.
3. LSA-III............................... Type IP-2................... Type IP-3.
4. SCO-I................................. Type IP-1................... Type IP-1.
5. SCO-II................................ Type IP-2................... Type IP-2.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
25. In Sec. 173.433, paragraphs (b) introductory text, (c)
introductory text, (c)(1), (d)(3) and (h) are revised to read as
follows:
Sec. 173.433 Requirements for determining basic radionuclide values,
and for the listing of radionuclides on shipping papers and labels.
* * * * *
(b) For individual radionuclides which are not listed in the tables
in Sec. 173.435 or Sec. 173.436 or for which no relevant data are
available:
* * * * *
(c) In calculating A[ihel1] and A2 values for approval
in accordance with paragraph (b)(2) of this section:
(1) It is permissible to use an A2 value calculated
using a dose coefficient for the appropriate lung absorption type, as
recommended by the International Commission on Radiological Protection,
if the chemical forms of each radionuclide under both normal and
accident conditions of transport are taken into consideration.
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(3) If the package contains both special and normal form Class 7
(radioactive) material, the activity which may be transported in a Type
A package must satisfy:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR11JY14.096
Where:
The symbols are defined as in paragraphs (d)(1) and (d)(2) of this
section.
* * * * *
(h) Tables 7 and 8 are as follows:
Table 7--General Values for A[ihel1] and A[ihel2]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A[ihel1] A[ihel2]
Radioactive contents ---------------------------------------------------------------
(TBq) (Ci) (TBq) (Ci)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Only beta or gamma emitting nuclides are 1 x 10-\1\ 2.7 x 10[deg] 2 x 10-\2\ 5.4 x 10-\1\
known to be present............................
2. Alpha emitting nuclides, but no beta, gamma, 2 x 10-\1\ 5.4 x 10\0\ 9 x 10-\5\ 2.4 x 10-\3\
or neutron emitters, are known to be present
\1\............................................
3. Neutron emitting nuclides are known to be 1 x 10-\3\ 2.7 x 10-\2\ 9 x 10-\5\ 2.4 x 10-\3\
present or no relevant data are available......
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ If beta or gamma emitting nuclides are also known to be present, the A[ihel1] value of 0.1 TBq (2.7 Ci)
should be used.
[[Page 40615]]
Table 8--General Exemption Values
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Activity concentration for Activity limits for exempt
exempt material consignments
Radioactive contents ---------------------------------------------------------------
(Bq/g) (Ci/g) (Bq) (Ci)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Only beta or gamma emitting nuclides are 1 x 10\1\ 2.7 x 10-\10\ 1 x 10\4\ 2.7 x 10-\7\
known to be present............................
2. Alpha emitting nuclides, but no neutron 1 x 10-\1\ 2.7 x 10-\12\ 1 x 10\3\ 2.7 x 10-\8\
emitters, are known to be present..............
3. Neutron emitting nuclides are known to be 1 x 10-\1\ 2.7 x 10-\12\ 1 x 10\3\ 2.7 x 10-\8\
present or no relevant data are available......
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
26. The Sec. 173.435 table is amended by adding the entry under
``[ADD]'' and revising entries under ``[REVISE]'' in the appropriate
alphabetical sequence, footnotes (a) and (c) are revised, and footnote
(h) is removed and reserved to read as follows:
Sec. 173.435 Table of A1 and A2 values for
radionuclides.
* * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Specific activity
Symbol of radionuclide Element and atomic A[ihel1] (TBq) A[ihel1] (Ci) A[ihel2] (TBq) A[ihel2] (Ci) -------------------------------
number \b\ \b\ (TBq/g) (Ci/g)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[ADD]
* * * * * * *
Kr-79............................. Krypton (36)........ 4.0 x 10 \0\ 1.1 x 10 \2\ 2.0 x 10 \0\ 5.4 x 10 \1\ 4.2 x 10 \4\ 1.1 x 10 \6\
* * * * * * *
[REVISE]
* * * * * * *
Cf-252............................ .................... 1 x 10-\1\ 2.7 3.0 x 10-\3\ 8.1 x 10-\2\ 2.0 x 10 \1\ 5.4 x 10 \2\
* * * * * * *
Mo-99(a)(i)....................... .................... 1.0 2.7 x 10 \1\ 6.0 x 10-\1\ 1.6 x 10 \1\ 1.8 x 10 \4\ 4.8 x 10 \5\
* * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ A[ihel1] and/or A[ihel2] values for these parent radionuclides include contributions from daughter nuclides with half-lives less than 10 days as
listed in footnote (a) to Table 2 in the ``IAEA Regulations for the Safe Transport of Radioactive Material, No. TS-R-1'' (IBR, see Sec. 171.7 of
this subchapter).
\b\ The values of A[ihel1] and A[ihel2] in curies (Ci) are approximate and for information only; the regulatory standard units are Terabecquerels (TBq),
(see Sec. 171.10).
\c\ The activity of Ir-192 in special form may be determined from a measurement of the rate of decay or a measurement of the radiation level at a
prescribed distance from the source.
* * * * *
\h\ [Reserved]
* * * * *
0
27. The Sec. 173.436 table is amended by adding the entry under
``[ADD]'' in the appropriate alphabetical sequence, revising the entry
under ``[REVISE]'', and revising footnote (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 173.436 Exempt material activity concentrations and exempt
consignment activity limits for radionuclides.
* * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Activity Activity
concentration concentration Activity limit Activity limit
Symbol of radionuclide Element and for exempt for exempt for exempt for exempt
atomic number material (Bq/ material (Ci/ consignment consignment
g) g) (Bq) (Ci)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[ADD]
* * * * * * *
Kr-79......................... Krypton (36).... 1.0 x 10 \3\ 2.7 x 10-\8\ 1.0 x 10 \5\ 2.7 x 10-\6\
* * * * * * *
[REVISE]
Te-121m....................... 1.0 x 10 \2\ 2.7 x 10-\9\ 1.0 x 10 \6\ 2.7 x 10-\5\
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
\b\ Parent nuclides and their progeny included in secular equilibrium are listed as follows:
Sr-90 Y-90
Zr-93 Nb-93m
[[Page 40616]]
Zr-97 Nb-97
Ru-106 Rh-106
Ag-108m Ag-108
Cs-137 Ba-137m
Ce-144 Pr-144
Ba-140 La-140
Bi-212 Tl-208 (0.36), Po-212 (0.64)
Pb-210 Bi-210, Po-210
Pb-212 Bi-212, Tl-208 (0.36), Po-212 (0.64)
Rn-222 Po-218, Pb-214, Bi-214, Po-214
Ra-223 Rn-219, Po-215, Pb-211, Bi-211, Tl-207
Ra-224 Rn-220, Po-216, Pb-212, Bi-212, Tl-208 (0.36), Po-212 (0.64),
Ra-226 Rn-222, Po-218, Pb-214, Bi-214, Bi-214, Po-214, Pb-210, Bi-210, Po-210
Ra-228 Ac-228
Th-228 Ra-224, Rn-220, Po-216, Pb-212, Bi-212, Tl-208 (0.36), Po-212(0.64)
Th-229 Ra-225, Ac-225, Fr-221, At-217, Bi-213, Po-213, Pb-209
Th-nat Ra-228, Ac-228, Th-228, Ra-224, Rn-220, Po-216, Pb-212, Bi-212, Tl-208 (0.36), Po-212 (0.64)
Th-234 Pa-234m
U-230 Th-226, Ra-222, Rn-218, Po-214
U-232 Th-228, Ra-224, Rn-220, Po-216, Pb-212, Bi-212, Tl-208 (0.36), Po-212 (0.64)
U-235 Th-231
U-238 Th-234, Pa-234m
U-nat Th-234, Pa-234m, U-234, Th-230, Ra-226, Rn-222, Po-218, Pb-214, Bi-214, Po-214, Pb-210, Bi-210, Po-210
Np-237 Pa-233
Am-242m Am-242
Am-243 Np-239
* * * * *
0
28. Section 173.443 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 173.443 Contamination control.
(a) The level of non-fixed contamination must be kept as low as
reasonably achievable on the external surfaces of each package,
conveyance, freight container, and overpack offered for transport, and
the internal surfaces of each conveyance, freight container, and
overpack in which inner packages or receptacles of Class 7
(radioactive) materials are offered for transport.
(1) Excluding the interior surfaces of the containment system of
packages and the internal surfaces of a conveyance, freight container,
tank, or intermediate bulk container dedicated to the transport of
unpackaged radioactive material in accordance with Sec. 173.427(c) and
remaining under that specific exclusive use, the level of non-fixed
contamination may not exceed the limits set forth in Table 9 and must
be determined by either:
(i) Wiping an area of 300 cm\2\ of the surface concerned with an
absorbent material, using moderate pressure, and measuring the activity
on the wiping material. Sufficient measurements must be taken in the
most appropriate locations to yield a representative assessment of the
non-fixed contamination levels. The amount of radioactivity measured on
any single wiping material, divided by the surface area wiped and
divided by the efficiency of the wipe procedure (the fraction of non-
fixed contamination transferred from the surface to the absorbent
material), may not exceed the limits set forth in Table 9 at any time
during transport. For this purpose the actual wipe efficiency may be
used, or the wipe efficiency may be assumed to be 0.10; or
(ii) Alternatively, the level of non-fixed contamination may be
determined by using other methods of equal or greater efficiency.
(2) A conveyance used for non-exclusive use shipments is not
required to be surveyed unless there is reason to suspect that it may
exhibit contamination.
Table 9 is as follows:
Table 9--Non-Fixed External Radioactive Contamination Limits for Packages
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximum permissible limits
Contaminant ------------------------------------------------
Bq/cm\2\ uCi/cm\2\ dpm/cm\2\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Beta and gamma emitters and low toxicity alpha emitters..... 4 10 -\4\ 240
2. All other alpha emitting radionuclides...................... 0.4 10-\5\ 24
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b) In the case of packages transported as exclusive use shipments
by rail or public highway only, except as provided in paragraph (d) of
this section, at any time during transport the non-fixed contamination
on the external surface of any package, as well as on the associated
accessible internal surfaces of any conveyance, overpack, or freight
container, may not exceed ten times the levels prescribed in paragraph
(a) of this section. The levels at the beginning of transport may not
exceed the levels prescribed in paragraph (a) of this section.
(c) Except as provided in paragraphs (a) and (d) of this section,
each conveyance, overpack, freight container, tank, or intermediate
bulk container used for transporting Class 7 (radioactive) materials as
an exclusive use shipment that utilizes the provisions of paragraph (b)
of this section, Sec. 173.427(b)(4), or Sec. 173.427(c) must be
surveyed with appropriate radiation detection instruments after each
exclusive use transport. Except as provided in paragraphs (a) and (d)
of this section, these items may not be returned to Class 7
(radioactive) materials exclusive use transport service, and then only
for a subsequent exclusive use shipment utilizing one of the above
cited provisions, unless the radiation dose rate at each accessible
surface is 0.005 mSv per hour (0.5 mrem per hour) or less, and there is
no significant non-fixed surface contamination as specified in
paragraph (a) of this section. The requirements of this paragraph do
not address return to service of items outside of the above cited
provisions.
(d) Paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section do not apply to any
closed
[[Page 40617]]
transport vehicle used solely for the exclusive use transportation by
highway or rail of Class 7 (radioactive) material with contamination
levels that do not exceed ten times the levels prescribed in paragraph
(a) of this section if--
(1) A survey of the interior surfaces of the empty vehicle shows
that the radiation dose rate at any point does not exceed 0.1 mSv/h (10
mrem/h) at the surface or 0.02 mSv/h (2 mrem/h) at 1 m (3.3 feet) from
the surface;
(2) Each vehicle is marked (e.g. stenciled) with the words ``For
Radioactive Materials Use Only'' in letters at least 76 millimeters (3
inches) high in a conspicuous place on both sides of the exterior of
the vehicle; and
(3) Each vehicle is kept closed except for loading or unloading;
and
(4) Each vehicle is placarded in accordance with subpart F of part
172 of this subchapter.
(e) If it is evident that a package of radioactive material, or
conveyance carrying unpackaged radioactive material, is leaking, or if
it is suspected that the package, or conveyance carrying unpackaged
material, may have leaked, access to the package or conveyance must be
restricted and, as soon as possible, the extent of contamination and
the resultant radiation level of the package or conveyance must be
assessed. The scope of the assessment must include, as applicable, the
package, the conveyance, the adjacent loading and unloading areas, and,
if necessary, all other material which has been carried in the
conveyance. When necessary, additional steps for the protection of
persons, property, and the environment must be taken to overcome and
minimize the consequences of such leakage. Packages, and conveyances
carrying unpackaged material, which are leaking radioactive contents in
excess of limits for normal conditions of transport may be removed to
an interim location under supervision, but must not be forwarded until
repaired or reconditioned and decontaminated, or as approved by the
Associate Administrator.
0
29. In Sec. 173.465, paragraphs (a) and (d)(1)(i) are revised to read
as follows:
Sec. 173.465 Type A packaging tests.
(a) The packaging, with contents, must be capable of withstanding
the water spray, free drop, stacking and penetration tests prescribed
in this section. One prototype may be used for all tests if the
requirements of paragraph (b) of this section are met. The tests are
successful if the requirements of Sec. 173.412(j) are met.
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) A total weight equal to five times the maximum weight of the
package; or
* * * * *
0
30. In Sec. 173.466, paragraph (a) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 173.466 Additional tests for Type A packagings designed for
liquids and gases.
(a) In addition to the tests prescribed in Sec. 173.465, Type A
packagings designed for liquids and gases must be capable of
withstanding the following tests in this section. The tests are
successful if the requirements of Sec. 173.412(k) are met.
* * * * *
0
31. In Sec. 173.469, paragraphs (b)(2)(ii), (b)(2)(iii), (d)(1) and
(d)(2) are revised, and a new paragraph (e) is added to read as
follows:
Sec. 173.469 Tests for special form Class 7 (radioactive) materials.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(2) * * *
(ii) The flat face of the billet must be 2.5 cm (1 inch) in
diameter with the edge rounded off to a radius of 3 mm 0.3
mm (0.12 inch 0.012 inch).
(iii) The lead must be of hardness number 3.5 to 4.5 on the Vickers
scale and thickness not more than 25 mm (1 inch), and must cover an
area greater than that covered by the specimen.
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(1) The impact test and the percussion test of this section
provided that the mass of the special form material is--
(i) Less than 200 g and it is alternatively subjected to the Class
4 impact test prescribed in ISO 2919 (IBR, see Sec. 171.7 of this
subchapter), or
(ii) Less than 500 g and it is alternatively subjected to the Class
5 impact test prescribed in ISO 2919 (IBR, see Sec. 171.7 of this
subchapter); and
(2) The heat test of this section, provided the specimen is
alternatively subjected to the Class 6 temperature test specified in
the International Organization for Standardization document ISO 2919
(IBR, see Sec. 171.7 of this subchapter).
(e) Special form materials that were successfully tested prior to
October 1, 2014 in accordance with the requirements of paragraph (d) of
this section in effect prior to October 1, 2014 may continue to be
offered for transportation and transported without additional testing
under this section.
0
32. In Sec. 173.473, paragraph (a)(1) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 173.473 Requirements for foreign-made packages.
* * * * *
(a) * * *
(1) Have the foreign competent authority certificate revalidated by
the U.S. Competent Authority, unless this has been done previously.
Each request for revalidation must be in triplicate, contain all the
information required by Section VIII of the IAEA regulations in ``IAEA
Regulations for the Safe Transport of Radioactive Material, No. TS-R-
1'' (IBR, see Sec. 171.7 of this subchapter), and include a copy in
English of the foreign competent authority certificate. The request and
accompanying documentation must be sent to the Associate Administrator
for Hazardous Materials Safety (PHH-23), Department of Transportation,
East Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
Alternatively, the request with any attached supporting documentation
submitted in an appropriate format may be sent by facsimile (fax) to
(202) 366-3753 or (202) 366-3650, or by electronic mail to
``ramcert@dot.gov.'' Each request is considered in the order in which
it is received. To allow sufficient time for consideration, requests
must be received at least 90 days before the requested effective date;
* * * * *
0
33. In Sec. 173.476, paragraph (a) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 173.476 Approval of special form Class 7 (radioactive)
materials.
(a) Each offeror of special form Class 7 (radioactive) materials
must maintain on file for at least two years after the offeror's latest
shipment, and provide to the Associate Administrator on request, a
complete safety analysis, including documentation of any tests,
demonstrating that the special form material meets the requirements of
Sec. 173.469. An IAEA Certificate of Competent Authority issued for
the special form material may be used to satisfy this requirement.
* * * * *
0
34. In Sec. 173.477, paragraph (a) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 173.477 Approval of packagings containing greater than 0.1 kg of
non-fissile or fissile-excepted uranium hexafluoride.
(a) Each offeror of a package containing more than 0.1 kg of
uranium hexafluoride must maintain on file for at least two years after
the offeror's latest shipment, and provide to the Associate
Administrator on request, a complete safety analysis, including
documentation of any tests, demonstrating that the package meets
[[Page 40618]]
the requirements of Sec. 173.420. An IAEA Certificate of Competent
Authority issued for the design of the packaging containing greater
than 0.1 kg of non-fissile or fissile-exempted uranium hexafluoride may
be used to satisfy this requirement.
* * * * *
PART 174--CARRIAGE BY RAIL
0
35. The authority citation for part 174 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101-5128; 49 CFR 1.81 and 1.97.
0
36. In Sec. 174.700, paragraph (e) is removed and reserved.
0
37. In Sec. 174.715, paragraph (a) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 174.715 Cleanliness of transport vehicles after use.
(a) Each transport vehicle used for transporting Class 7
(radioactive) materials under exclusive use conditions (as defined in
Sec. 173.403 of this subchapter) in accordance with Sec.
173.427(b)(4), Sec. 173.427(c), or Sec. 173.443(b), must be surveyed
with appropriate radiation detection instruments after each use. A
transport vehicle may not be returned to Class 7 (radioactive)
materials exclusive use transport service, and then only for a
subsequent exclusive use shipment utilizing the provisions of any of
the paragraphs Sec. 173.427(b)(4), Sec. 173.427(c), or Sec.
173.443(b), until the radiation dose rate at any accessible surface is
0.005 mSv per hour (0.5 mrem per hour) or less, and there is no
significant non-fixed contamination, as specified in Sec. 173.443(a)
of this subchapter
* * * * *
PART 175--CARRIAGE BY AIRCRAFT
0
38. The authority citation for part 175 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101-5128, 44701; 49 CFR 1.81 and 1.97.
0
39. In Sec. 175.702, paragraph (b) is revised to read as set forth
below, and paragraph (c) is removed:
Sec. 175.702 Separation distance requirements for packages containing
Class 7 (radioactive) materials in cargo aircraft.
* * * * *
(b) In addition to the limits on combined criticality safety
indexes stated in Sec. 175.700(b),
(1) The criticality safety index of any single group of packages
must not exceed 50.0 (as used in this section, the term ``group of
packages'' means packages that are separated from each other in an
aircraft by a distance of 6 m (20 feet) or less); and
(2) Each group of packages must be separated from every other group
in the aircraft by not less than 6 m (20 feet), measured from the outer
surface of each group.
0
40. In Sec. 175.705, paragraph (c) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 175.705 Radioactive contamination.
* * * * *
(c) An aircraft in which Class 7 (radioactive) material has been
released must be taken out of service and may not be returned to
service or routinely occupied until the aircraft is checked for
radioactive substances and it is determined that any radioactive
substances present do not meet the definition of radioactive material,
as defined in Sec. 173.403 of this subchapter.
* * * * *
PART 176--CARRIAGE BY VESSEL
0
41. The authority citation for part 176 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101-5128; 49 CFR 1.81 and 1.97.
0
42. Section 176.715 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 176.715 Contamination control.
Each hold, compartment, or deck area used for the transportation of
low specific activity or surface contaminated object Class 7
(radioactive) materials under exclusive use conditions in accordance
with Sec. 173.427(b)(4), or Sec. 173.427(c) must be surveyed with
appropriate radiation detection instruments after each use. Such holds,
compartments, and deck areas may not be used again for Class 7
(radioactive) materials exclusive use transport service, and then only
for a subsequent exclusive use shipment utilizing the provisions of
Sec. 173.427(b)(4), or Sec. 173.427(c) until the radiation dose rate
at every accessible surface is less than 0.005 mSv/h (0.5 mrem/h), and
the non-fixed contamination is not greater than the limits prescribed
in Sec. 173.443(a) of this subchapter.
PART 177--CARRIAGE BY PUBLIC HIGHWAY
0
43. The authority citation for part 177 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101-5128; sec. 112 of Pub. L. 103-311,
108 Stat. 1673, 1676 (1994); sec. 32509 of Pub. L. 112-141, 126
Stat. 405, 805 (2012); 49 CFR 1.81 and 1.97.
0
44. In Sec. 177.843 paragraph (a) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 177.843 Contamination of vehicles.
(a) Each motor vehicle used for transporting Class 7 (radioactive)
materials under exclusive use conditions in accordance with Sec.
173.427(b)(4), Sec. 173.427(c), or Sec. 173.443(b) of this subchapter
must be surveyed with radiation detection instruments after each use. A
vehicle may not be returned to Class 7 (radioactive) materials
exclusive use transport service, and then only for a subsequent
exclusive use shipment utilizing the provisions of any of the
paragraphs Sec. 173.427(b)(4), Sec. 173.427(c), or Sec. 173.443(b),
until the radiation dose rate at every accessible surface is 0.005 mSv/
h (0.5 mrem/h) or less and the non-fixed contamination is not greater
than the level prescribed in Sec. 173.443(a) of this subchapter.
* * * * *
PART 178--SPECIFICATIONS FOR PACKAGINGS
0
45. The authority citation for part 178 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101-5128; 49 CFR 1.81 and 1.97.
0
46. In Sec. 178.350, paragraph (c) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 178.350 Specification 7A; general packaging, Type A.
* * * * *
(c) Each Specification 7A packaging must comply with the
requirements of Sec. Sec. 178.2 and 178.3. In Sec. 178.3(a)(2) the
term ``packaging manufacturer'' means the person certifying that the
package meets all requirements of this section.
0
47. Section 178.356 and Sec. Sec. 178.356-1 through 178.358-6 are
removed.
0
48. Section 178.358 and Sec. Sec. 178.358-1 through 178.358-6 are
removed.
0
49. Section 178.360 and Sec. Sec. 178.360-1 through 178.360-4 are
removed.
Issued in Washington, DC, on June 27, 2014 under authority
delegated in 49 CFR 1.97.
Cynthia L. Quarterman,
Administrator, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration.
[FR Doc. 2014-15514 Filed 7-10-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-60-P