Hazardous Materials: The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Requirements on Gasoline Transport Vehicles, 30371-30372 [2021-11494]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 107 / Monday, June 7, 2021 / Notices
Application
No.
Applicant
12240–M ......
Spence Air Service .................
13173–M ......
Luxfer Canada Limited ............
13220–M ......
Entegris, Inc ............................
173.302, 173.302c ..................
14518–M ......
Federal Cartridge Company ....
172.301(c), 173.56(b), 173.62
16231–M ......
Thales Alenia Space ...............
20279–M ......
City Carbonic LLC ...................
172.101(j), 173.301(f),
173.302a(a)(1),
173.304a(a)(2).
180.207(d)(1) ...........................
21069–M ......
Catalina Composites, Inc ........
173.302a, 178.71(l)(1) .............
Regulation(s) affected
[FR Doc. 2021–11876 Filed 6–4–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials
Safety Administration
[Docket No. PHMSA–98–3599; PD–19(R)]
Hazardous Materials: The New York
State Department of Environmental
Conservation Requirements on
Gasoline Transport Vehicles
Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration,
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Dismissal of petition for
reconsideration of an administrative
determination of preemption.
AGENCY:
This proceeding was initiated
in February 1998, when the National
Tank Truck Carriers, Inc. (NTTC)
applied to the Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration 1
(PHMSA) for a determination that the
HMTA preempted certain marking and
record keeping requirements of the New
York State Department of
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
1 At the time of NTTC’s application, PHMSA did
not exist. PHMSA was created on February 20,
2005, when the Secretary of Transportation
redelegated hazardous materials safety functions
from the Research and Special Programs
Administration (RSPA) to PHMSA’s Administrator.
For consistency, the terms ‘‘PHMSA,’’ ‘‘the agency,’’
and ‘‘we’’ are used throughout this decision,
regardless of whether an action was taken by RSPA
before February 20, 2005, or by PHMSA after that
date.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:36 Jun 04, 2021
Jkt 253001
172.101(j), 172.200,
172.204(c)(3), 172.301,
173.27(b)(1), 175.33,
175.75(b).
172.101(j), 173.302a(a)(1),
180.205(g).
Nature of the special permits thereof
To modify the special permit to waive certain marking and
shipping paper requirements. (mode 5).
To modify the special permit to authorize use the manufacture, marking, sale, and use of non-DOT specification fully
wrapped carbon-fiber reinforced aluminum lined cylinders
which are manifolded and permanently mounted in a protective frame for the transportation in commerce of the materials authorized by this special permit and authorize the
use of a pneumatic proof pressure test for periodic requalification. (modes 1, 2, 3, 4).
To modify the special permit by authorizing additional carbon
steels specified for the cylindrical shell of the pressure vessel. (modes 1, 2, 3).
To modify the special permit to authorize primers to be
shipped without an EX approval. (mode 1).
To modify the special permit to authorize additional 2.3
hazmat. (modes 1, 3, 4).
To modify the special permit to remove specific manufacturer
applicability to the manufacture of authorized cylinders.
(modes 1, 2, 3, 4, 5).
To modify the special permit to authorize ISO 9712 as alternative to ISO 11515:2013 Section 9.1.1 certification.
(modes 1, 2, 3, 4).
Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC).
PHMSA found that the HMTA
preempted the NYSDEC requirements
because the requirements were not
substantively the same as requirements
in the HMR on the marking,
maintaining, repairing, or testing of a
package or container that is represented,
marked, certified, or sold as qualified
for transporting hazardous material.
NYSDEC’s petition for reconsideration
of that decision is dismissed on the
grounds of mootness. NYSDEC has
made significant revisions to its
regulations, and the revised rules do not
appear to impose the same requirements
on regulated entities as the previous
version of the rules that were challenged
in this proceeding. It therefore does not
appear that reconsidering PHMSA’s
preemption determination regarding the
now-superseded NYSDEC rules would
have any practical effect.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Vincent Lopez, Office of Chief Counsel,
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590;
Telephone No. 202–366–4400;
Facsimile No. 202–366–7041.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Petitioner: New York State
Department of Environmental
Conservation.
Local Law Affected: New York Codes,
Rules and Regulations (NYCRR),
PO 00000
Frm 00122
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
30371
Chapter 6, Sections 230.4(a)(3), 230.6(b)
& (c).2
Applicable Federal Requirements:
Federal Hazardous Material
Transportation Law (HMTA), 49 U.S.C.
5101 et seq., and the Hazardous
Materials Regulations (HMR), 49 CFR
parts 171–180.
Mode Affected: Highway.
I. Background
This proceeding was initiated in
February 1998, when NTTC applied to
PHMSA for a determination that the
HMTA preempted certain marking and
record keeping requirements of
NYSDEC.
After NTTC filed its application, two
key rulemakings occurred that delayed
PHMSA’s decision on NTTC’s claims.
The rulemakings, one initiated by
PHMSA, and the other by the United
States Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA), although not related, addressed
many of the issues raised in NTTC’s
application. The agencies’ rulemaking
activities spanned several years and
culminated in December 2009, when
EPA issued a rule change and
clarification of its rules.3
2 The NYSDEC repealed and replaced Part 230,
with an effective date of February 11, 2021. The
marking requirement in 6 NYCRR 230.4(a)(3), as
amended, was recodified in 6 NYCRR 230.6(a)(2).
The recordkeeping and retention requirements of 6
NYCRR 230.6(b) and (c), as amended, were
recodified in 6 NYCRR 230.7(a)(1) and (a)(2),
respectively.
3 Final Rule, 73 FR 1916 (January 10, 2008);
corrections, 73 FR 12275 (March 7, 2008); Final
E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM
Continued
07JNN1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
30372
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 107 / Monday, June 7, 2021 / Notices
Earlier in 2009, and subsequent to the
publication of final rules in each of the
PHMSA and EPA rulemakings, but
before EPA’s clarification of its rules,
PHMSA issued its decision on NTTC’s
application. On January 23, 2009,
PHMSA published in the Federal
Register its determination of NTTC’s
application in Preemption
Determination No. 19(R) (PD–19(R)), 74
FR 4291.4 PHMSA found that the
HMTA preempted the following
NYSDEC requirements because the
requirements were not substantively the
same as requirements in the HMR on the
marking, maintaining, repairing, or
testing of a package or container that is
represented, marked, certified, or sold
as qualified for transporting hazardous
material:
• 6 NYCRR 230.4(a)(3)—requirement
that the marking must be a minimum
two inches and contain ‘‘NYS DEC’’;
• 6 NYCRR 230.6(b)—requirement for
maintaining a copy of the most recent
pressure-vacuum test results with the
gasoline transport vehicle; and
• 6 NYCRR 230.6(c)—requirement to
retain pressure-vacuum test and repair
results for two years.
Within the 20-day time period
provided in 49 CFR 107.211(a),
NYSDEC submitted a petition for
reconsideration of PHMSA’s decision in
PD–19(R). NYSDEC asked PHMSA to
rescind its preemption determination
and dismiss the application by NTTC. In
April 2009, PHMSA extended the
period for comments on NYSDEC’s
petition due to the unusually long
period it took for the agency to issue
PD–19(R). This action was followed by
another extended period of inactivity
until August 26, 2010, when PHMSA
reopened the period for comments on
NYSDEC’s petition for reconsideration
to receive comments on EPA’s rule
changes. The matter has remained
dormant since that time based on
PHMSA’s understanding that NYSDEC
was planning to revise its regulations.
On February 12, 2020, NYSDEC
proposed a rulemaking to repeal and
replace 6 NYCRR Part 230 Gasoline
Dispensing Sites and Transport
Vehicles. Volume XLII, Issue 6, N.Y.
Reg, 8 (February 12, 2020). The adopted
requirements in 6 NYCRR Part 230,
sections 230.6 and 230.7, became
effective on February 11, 2021. These
provisions contain revised versions of
the requirements that were at issue in
this proceeding for marking gasoline
Rule with amendments and clarifications, 76 FR
4156 (January 24, 2011).
4 As published in the Federal Register, the
agency’s January 23, 2009 determination in PD–
19(R) indicated an incorrect docket number (99–
3559, instead of 98–3559).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:36 Jun 04, 2021
Jkt 253001
transport vehicles and recordkeeping
and reporting requirements.
II. Dismissal on Grounds of Mootness
NYSDEC’s legislative changes to its
rules have rendered moot NYSDEC’s
petition for reconsideration of PHMSA’s
2009 preemption determination.
NYSDEC, in its February 12, 2020,
rulemaking proposal, required pressurevacuum cargo tank testing and markings
that align with DOT’s testing and
marking requirements. NYSDEC
indicated that the proposed
amendments would make the
requirements consistent on the state and
federal level. Furthermore, NYSDEC
proposed to revise the gasoline transport
vehicle recordkeeping retention
requirements from 2 years to 5 years in
order to align with the current version
of the EPA’s recordkeeping requirement
located at 40 CFR part 63 subpart
CCCCCC.
The recently adopted requirements in
6 NYCRR Part 230, sections 230.6 and
230.7, became effective on February 11,
2021. These provisions contain the
requirements that were at issue in this
proceeding for marking gasoline
transport vehicles and recordkeeping
and reporting requirements. The
provision for the marking of gasoline
transport vehicles states:
(a) No owner or operator of a gasoline
transport vehicle may transport gasoline or
allow the vehicle to be filled or emptied in
New York State unless the gasoline transport
vehicle meets:
(1) the federal Department of
Transportation (DOT) requirements for leak
testing as required by 49 CFR 180.407(h) (see
Table 1, Section 200.9 of this Title); and
(2) the federal DOT requirements for test
markings as required by 49 CFR 180.415 (see
Table 1, Section 200.9 of this Title).
6 NYCRR 230.6.
The recordkeeping and reporting
provision states:
(a) The owner of any gasoline transport
vehicle subject to the leak testing
requirements outlined in section 230.6(a) of
this Part shall keep:
(1) leak testing records with information as
prescribed by 49 CFR 180.417(b)(1) and (2)
(see Table 1, Section 200.9 of this Title) for
5 years; and
(2) a copy of the most recent leak testing
results with the gasoline transport vehicle.
6 NYCRR 230.7.
In light of the facts and circumstances
described above, it is apparent the
NYSDEC rules that PHMSA found were
preempted under the HMTA—and
subject of NYSDEC’s petition for
reconsideration—have been
significantly revised. On their face, the
revised rules do not appear to impose
the same requirements on regulated
PO 00000
Frm 00123
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
entities as the previous version of the
rules that were challenged in this
proceeding. Consequently, it would be
inappropriate for PHMSA to render a
decision on a petition for
reconsideration that was filed more than
a decade ago, for relief from the agency’s
preemption determination that was
based on a previous version of
NYSDEC’s pressure-vacuum cargo tank
testing and markings requirements
when those requirements have recently
undergone significant revisions. It
appears that issuing a decision on the
petition for reconsideration would have
no practical effect on any party.
III. Ruling
For the reasons set forth above,
NYSDEC’s petition for reconsideration
is dismissed because the issues raised in
the petition are moot.
Going forward, any person directly
affected by the revised NYSDEC rules
(including a State, political subdivision
of a State, or Indian tribe) may apply to
PHMSA for a decision on whether the
revised rules are preempted by the
HMTA. 49 U.S.C. 5125(d); 49 CFR
107.203. Similarly, any person who
thinks there is a practical reason for
PHMSA to revisit its preemption
decision regarding the now-superseded
rules may apply to PHMSA for a new
decision on that question.
Issued in Washington, DC, on May 26,
2021.
Vasiliki Tsaganos,
Acting Chief Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2021–11494 Filed 6–4–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–60–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials
Safety Administration
Hazardous Materials: Notice of
Applications for New Special Permits
Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration
(PHMSA), DOT.
ACTION: List of applications for special
permits.
AGENCY:
In accordance with the
procedures governing the application
for, and the processing of, special
permits from the Department of
Transportation’s Hazardous Material
Regulations, notice is hereby given that
the Office of Hazardous Materials Safety
has received the application described
herein. Each mode of transportation for
which a particular special permit is
requested is indicated by a number in
the ‘‘Nature of Application’’ portion of
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM
07JNN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 107 (Monday, June 7, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30371-30372]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-11494]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
[Docket No. PHMSA-98-3599; PD-19(R)]
Hazardous Materials: The New York State Department of
Environmental Conservation Requirements on Gasoline Transport Vehicles
AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration,
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Dismissal of petition for reconsideration of an administrative
determination of preemption.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This proceeding was initiated in February 1998, when the
National Tank Truck Carriers, Inc. (NTTC) applied to the Pipeline and
Hazardous Materials Safety Administration \1\ (PHMSA) for a
determination that the HMTA preempted certain marking and record
keeping requirements of the New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation (NYSDEC). PHMSA found that the HMTA preempted the NYSDEC
requirements because the requirements were not substantively the same
as requirements in the HMR on the marking, maintaining, repairing, or
testing of a package or container that is represented, marked,
certified, or sold as qualified for transporting hazardous material.
NYSDEC's petition for reconsideration of that decision is dismissed on
the grounds of mootness. NYSDEC has made significant revisions to its
regulations, and the revised rules do not appear to impose the same
requirements on regulated entities as the previous version of the rules
that were challenged in this proceeding. It therefore does not appear
that reconsidering PHMSA's preemption determination regarding the now-
superseded NYSDEC rules would have any practical effect.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ At the time of NTTC's application, PHMSA did not exist.
PHMSA was created on February 20, 2005, when the Secretary of
Transportation redelegated hazardous materials safety functions from
the Research and Special Programs Administration (RSPA) to PHMSA's
Administrator. For consistency, the terms ``PHMSA,'' ``the agency,''
and ``we'' are used throughout this decision, regardless of whether
an action was taken by RSPA before February 20, 2005, or by PHMSA
after that date.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Vincent Lopez, Office of Chief
Counsel, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, U.S.
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
20590; Telephone No. 202-366-4400; Facsimile No. 202-366-7041.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Petitioner: New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation.
Local Law Affected: New York Codes, Rules and Regulations (NYCRR),
Chapter 6, Sections 230.4(a)(3), 230.6(b) & (c).\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The NYSDEC repealed and replaced Part 230, with an effective
date of February 11, 2021. The marking requirement in 6 NYCRR
230.4(a)(3), as amended, was recodified in 6 NYCRR 230.6(a)(2). The
recordkeeping and retention requirements of 6 NYCRR 230.6(b) and
(c), as amended, were recodified in 6 NYCRR 230.7(a)(1) and (a)(2),
respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicable Federal Requirements: Federal Hazardous Material
Transportation Law (HMTA), 49 U.S.C. 5101 et seq., and the Hazardous
Materials Regulations (HMR), 49 CFR parts 171-180.
Mode Affected: Highway.
I. Background
This proceeding was initiated in February 1998, when NTTC applied
to PHMSA for a determination that the HMTA preempted certain marking
and record keeping requirements of NYSDEC.
After NTTC filed its application, two key rulemakings occurred that
delayed PHMSA's decision on NTTC's claims. The rulemakings, one
initiated by PHMSA, and the other by the United States Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), although not related, addressed many of the
issues raised in NTTC's application. The agencies' rulemaking
activities spanned several years and culminated in December 2009, when
EPA issued a rule change and clarification of its rules.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Final Rule, 73 FR 1916 (January 10, 2008); corrections, 73
FR 12275 (March 7, 2008); Final Rule with amendments and
clarifications, 76 FR 4156 (January 24, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 30372]]
Earlier in 2009, and subsequent to the publication of final rules
in each of the PHMSA and EPA rulemakings, but before EPA's
clarification of its rules, PHMSA issued its decision on NTTC's
application. On January 23, 2009, PHMSA published in the Federal
Register its determination of NTTC's application in Preemption
Determination No. 19(R) (PD-19(R)), 74 FR 4291.\4\ PHMSA found that the
HMTA preempted the following NYSDEC requirements because the
requirements were not substantively the same as requirements in the HMR
on the marking, maintaining, repairing, or testing of a package or
container that is represented, marked, certified, or sold as qualified
for transporting hazardous material:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ As published in the Federal Register, the agency's January
23, 2009 determination in PD-19(R) indicated an incorrect docket
number (99-3559, instead of 98-3559).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
6 NYCRR 230.4(a)(3)--requirement that the marking must be
a minimum two inches and contain ``NYS DEC'';
6 NYCRR 230.6(b)--requirement for maintaining a copy of
the most recent pressure-vacuum test results with the gasoline
transport vehicle; and
6 NYCRR 230.6(c)--requirement to retain pressure-vacuum
test and repair results for two years.
Within the 20-day time period provided in 49 CFR 107.211(a), NYSDEC
submitted a petition for reconsideration of PHMSA's decision in PD-
19(R). NYSDEC asked PHMSA to rescind its preemption determination and
dismiss the application by NTTC. In April 2009, PHMSA extended the
period for comments on NYSDEC's petition due to the unusually long
period it took for the agency to issue PD-19(R). This action was
followed by another extended period of inactivity until August 26,
2010, when PHMSA reopened the period for comments on NYSDEC's petition
for reconsideration to receive comments on EPA's rule changes. The
matter has remained dormant since that time based on PHMSA's
understanding that NYSDEC was planning to revise its regulations.
On February 12, 2020, NYSDEC proposed a rulemaking to repeal and
replace 6 NYCRR Part 230 Gasoline Dispensing Sites and Transport
Vehicles. Volume XLII, Issue 6, N.Y. Reg, 8 (February 12, 2020). The
adopted requirements in 6 NYCRR Part 230, sections 230.6 and 230.7,
became effective on February 11, 2021. These provisions contain revised
versions of the requirements that were at issue in this proceeding for
marking gasoline transport vehicles and recordkeeping and reporting
requirements.
II. Dismissal on Grounds of Mootness
NYSDEC's legislative changes to its rules have rendered moot
NYSDEC's petition for reconsideration of PHMSA's 2009 preemption
determination.
NYSDEC, in its February 12, 2020, rulemaking proposal, required
pressure-vacuum cargo tank testing and markings that align with DOT's
testing and marking requirements. NYSDEC indicated that the proposed
amendments would make the requirements consistent on the state and
federal level. Furthermore, NYSDEC proposed to revise the gasoline
transport vehicle recordkeeping retention requirements from 2 years to
5 years in order to align with the current version of the EPA's
recordkeeping requirement located at 40 CFR part 63 subpart CCCCCC.
The recently adopted requirements in 6 NYCRR Part 230, sections
230.6 and 230.7, became effective on February 11, 2021. These
provisions contain the requirements that were at issue in this
proceeding for marking gasoline transport vehicles and recordkeeping
and reporting requirements. The provision for the marking of gasoline
transport vehicles states:
(a) No owner or operator of a gasoline transport vehicle may
transport gasoline or allow the vehicle to be filled or emptied in
New York State unless the gasoline transport vehicle meets:
(1) the federal Department of Transportation (DOT) requirements
for leak testing as required by 49 CFR 180.407(h) (see Table 1,
Section 200.9 of this Title); and
(2) the federal DOT requirements for test markings as required
by 49 CFR 180.415 (see Table 1, Section 200.9 of this Title).
6 NYCRR 230.6.
The recordkeeping and reporting provision states:
(a) The owner of any gasoline transport vehicle subject to the
leak testing requirements outlined in section 230.6(a) of this Part
shall keep:
(1) leak testing records with information as prescribed by 49
CFR 180.417(b)(1) and (2) (see Table 1, Section 200.9 of this Title)
for 5 years; and
(2) a copy of the most recent leak testing results with the
gasoline transport vehicle.
6 NYCRR 230.7.
In light of the facts and circumstances described above, it is
apparent the NYSDEC rules that PHMSA found were preempted under the
HMTA--and subject of NYSDEC's petition for reconsideration--have been
significantly revised. On their face, the revised rules do not appear
to impose the same requirements on regulated entities as the previous
version of the rules that were challenged in this proceeding.
Consequently, it would be inappropriate for PHMSA to render a decision
on a petition for reconsideration that was filed more than a decade
ago, for relief from the agency's preemption determination that was
based on a previous version of NYSDEC's pressure-vacuum cargo tank
testing and markings requirements when those requirements have recently
undergone significant revisions. It appears that issuing a decision on
the petition for reconsideration would have no practical effect on any
party.
III. Ruling
For the reasons set forth above, NYSDEC's petition for
reconsideration is dismissed because the issues raised in the petition
are moot.
Going forward, any person directly affected by the revised NYSDEC
rules (including a State, political subdivision of a State, or Indian
tribe) may apply to PHMSA for a decision on whether the revised rules
are preempted by the HMTA. 49 U.S.C. 5125(d); 49 CFR 107.203.
Similarly, any person who thinks there is a practical reason for PHMSA
to revisit its preemption decision regarding the now-superseded rules
may apply to PHMSA for a new decision on that question.
Issued in Washington, DC, on May 26, 2021.
Vasiliki Tsaganos,
Acting Chief Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2021-11494 Filed 6-4-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-60-P