[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 136 (Thursday, July 16, 1998)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 38456-38459]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-19108]
[[Page 38455]]
_______________________________________________________________________
Part II
Department of Transportation
_______________________________________________________________________
Research and Special Programs Administration
_______________________________________________________________________
49 CFR Parts 171, 177, 178, and 180
Hazardous Materials: Safety Standards for Preventing and Mitigating
Unintentional Releases During the Unloading of Cargo Tank Motor
Vehicles in Liquefied Compressed Gas Service; Proposed Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 136 / Thursday, July 16, 1998 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 38456]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Research and Special Programs Administration
49 CFR Parts 171, 177, 178, 180
[Docket No. RSPA-97-2718 (HM-225A)]
RIN 2137-AD07
Hazardous Materials: Safety Standards for Preventing and
Mitigating Unintentional Releases During the Unloading of Cargo Tank
Motor Vehicles in Liquefied Compressed Gas Service
AGENCY: Research and Special Programs Administration (RSPA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of establishment of advisory committee for negotiated
rulemaking and notice of first meeting.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: RSPA announces the establishment of an advisory committee to
develop recommendations for alternative safety standards for preventing
and mitigating unintentional releases of hazardous materials during the
unloading of cargo tank motor vehicles in liquefied compressed gas
service. The Committee will develop and adopt its recommendations
through negotiation. The Committee is composed of persons who represent
the interests affected by the proposed rule, such as businesses that
transport and deliver propane, anhydrous ammonia, and other liquefied
compressed gases; manufacturers of DOT specification MC 330 and MC 331
cargo tank motor vehicles used to transport liquefied compressed gases;
state and local public safety and emergency response agencies; and the
federal Department of Transportation. This notice also announces the
time and place of the first advisory committee meeting. The public is
invited to attend; an opportunity for members of the public to make
oral presentations will be provided if time permits.
DATES: The first meeting of the advisory committee will be from 9:30
a.m. to 4:00 p.m. on Tuesday, July 28, 1998 and will continue from 9:30
a.m. to 4:00 p.m. on Wednesday, July 29, 1998.
ADDRESSES: The first meeting of the advisory committee will take place
at the Department of Transportation, Room 2230, 400 Seventh Street,
S.W., Washington, D.C.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jennifer Karim, 202-366-8553, Office
of Hazardous Materials Standards, Research and Special Programs
Administration, Department of Transportation; or Nancy Machado, 202-
366-4400, Office of the Chief Counsel, Research and Special Programs
Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation. Facilitator: Philip
J. Harter, The Mediation Consortium, 202-887-1033.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On June 4, 1998, RSPA published a notice of intent to establish an
advisory committee (Committee) for a negotiated rulemaking to develop
recommendations for alternative safety standards for preventing and
mitigating unintentional releases of hazardous materials during the
unloading of cargo tank motor vehicles (CTMVs) in liquefied compressed
gas service. The notice requested comment on membership, the interests
affected by the rulemaking, the issues the Committee should address,
and the procedures it should follow. The reader is referred to the June
4 notice (63 FR 30572) for further information on these issues.
RSPA received 19 written comments on the notice of intent. In
addition, 43 people participated in a public meeting in Washington,
D.C., on June 23-24, 1998. All endorsed the negotiated rulemaking
process. Based on this response, and for the reasons stated in the
notice of intent, RSPA has determined that establishing an advisory
committee on this subject is appropriate and in the public interest. In
accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA; 5 U.S.C. App.
I sec. 9(c)), RSPA prepared a Charter for the Establishment of a
Negotiated Rulemaking Advisory Committee. RSPA intends to file the
charter within fifteen (15) days from the date of this publication.
II. Membership
A total of 29 individuals were nominated or applied for membership
to the Negotiated Rulemaking Committee either through written comments
or at the June 23-24 public meeting.
In considering requests for representation on the Committee, the
task before RSPA was to decide whether the requesters represent
interests significantly affected by the proposed rulemaking. As
identified in the notice of intent, in addition to the Department of
Transportation (DOT), these interests are: the National Propane Gas
Association (NPGA); The Fertilizer Institute (TFI); National Tank Truck
Carriers, Inc. (NTTC); the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA);
small businesses that transport and deliver propane, anhydrous ammonia,
and other liquefied compressed gases; large businesses that transport
and deliver propane, anhydrous ammonia, and other liquefied compressed
gases; manufacturers of DOT MC 330 and MC 331 specification CTMVs used
to transport liquefied compressed gases; state safety regulatory
agencies; state safety enforcement agencies; and state/local emergency
response and fire services agencies.
In response to comments, RSPA has modified the list of interests to
add the Compressed Gas Association to represent the interest of
companies that produce and use liquefied compressed gases other than
propane and anhydrous ammonia, such as oxygen and nitrogen. In
addition, to accommodate the separate interests of large and small
companies that may be affected by the rulemaking and the separate
interests of companies that transport propane versus anhydrous ammonia,
RSPA has identified as distinct interests small propane distribution
companies, large propane distribution companies, small anhydrous
ammonia distribution companies, and large anhydrous ammonia
distribution companies. Finally, RSPA believes that the interests of
companies that manufacture so-called ``bobtail'' CTMVs (most commonly
defined as truck-mounted tanks having a capacity under 3,500 gallons)
differ sufficiently from the interests of companies that manufacture
``transport'' CTMVs (most commonly defined as semi-trailers or full
trailers having a capacity greater than 3,500 gallons) as to justify
separate representation on the Committee.
In the notice of intent, RSPA requested comments on how best to
include manufacturers of cargo tank components, such as internal self-
closing stop valves, pumps, meters, and other components of emergency
discharge control systems and remote shut-off systems. RSPA believes
that component manufacturers have technical expertise that would be
valuable to the Committee's deliberations. As noted in the notice of
intent, the convener's report examined several options for integrating
component manufacturers into the negotiated rulemaking process. The
convener recommended that they participate as members of work groups
that the Committee may establish to gather information and develop
proposals for specific issues related to the rulemaking, but not as
members of the Committee itself.
Many commenters support the recommendation of the convener's report
and oppose inclusion of component manufacturers on the Committee
because these manufacturers may have a vested interest in
[[Page 38457]]
developing a solution that includes their equipment. However, other
commenters believe that component manufacturers should be members of
the Committee because they will be significantly affected by any
rulemaking that results from the Committee's deliberations. RSPA agrees
with these commenters and believes that technology interests, such as
manufacturers of internal self-closing stop valves, hoses, remote shut-
off systems, and leak detection sensors and monitors, should be
included on the Committee. Thus, RSPA has modified the list of
interests that will be represented to include a technology interest.
Following is the list of Committee members, identified by interest.
Members are encouraged to designate alternates who can serve in place
of the member if necessary. As noted in the notice of intent, the
Committee will make its decisions through a process of negotiation
leading to consensus. ``Consensus'' means the unanimous concurrence
among the interests represented on the Committee, unless the Committee
explicitly adopts a different definition. Where two representatives are
identified, RSPA expects that they will act together to represent the
interest's views and perspectives in the negotiations.
For the interest identified as ``Cargo Tank Manufacturers--
Bobtail,'' RSPA has requested that the three individuals identified
below consult with each other to determine how their interest will be
represented on the Committee. Similarly, for the interest identified as
``Technology,'' RSPA has asked the three identified individuals to
consult with each other to determine how the technology interest will
be represented on the Committee.
1. Department of Transportation
Edward Mazzullo, Research and Special Programs Administration
2. National Propane Gas Association
Charles Revere, Revere Gas and Appliance
3. The Fertilizer Institute
Charles Rosas, Farmland Industries
4. National Tank Truck Carriers
Clifford Harvison
5. Compressed Gas Association
Ronald McGrath
6. National Fire Protection Association
Theodore Lemhoff
7. Propane Distribution--Small
Mike Gorham, Northwest Gas, and Lin Johnson, Lin's Propane
8. Propane Distribution--Large
Russell Rupp, Suburban Propane, and Ken Faulhaber, Ferrellgas
9. Anhydrous Ammonia/Dual Use Anhydrous Ammonia-Propane--Small
Charles Whittington, Grammer Industries
10. Anhydrous Ammonia/Dual Use Anhydrous Ammonia-Propane--Large
Jean Trobec, Growmark, and Jim York, National Private Truck Council
11. State Safety Enforcement Agencies
Steve Herman, Cooperative Hazardous Materials Enforcement
Development (COHMED), and Eric Adair, Commercial Vehicle Safety
Alliance (CVSA)
12. State Safety Regulatory Agencies
Vicki O'Neill, Bureau of Liquefied Petroleum Gas Inspections/
Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, and Ronald
Coleman, California State Fire Marshal
13. State/Local Emergency Response Agencies and Fire Services
Ronald Dykes, International Association of Fire Chiefs
14. Cargo Tank Manufacturers--Transports
Mike Pitts, Mississippi Tank
15. Cargo Tank Manufacturers--Bobtails (one of the following)
David Auxier, Bulk Tank and Transport, or Jerry Kowalski, Arrow
Tank and Engineering, or David Fulbright, White River Distributors
16. Technology (one of the following)
Jim Griffin, Fisher Controls, or David Stainbrook, REGO Valve, or
Bob Lyons, Thermolite, or Todd Coady, Rocket Supply
In addition to those listed above, the following people asked to be
members or were nominated for membership on the Committee: Gary Nelson,
Nevada Propane Board (Nelson); Douglas Buchan (Buchan); Paul Horgan,
California Highway Patrol (Horgan); and Terry Pollard, Nebraska Highway
Patrol (Pollard).
Buchan asked to participate based on his expertise and experience
with the issues that are the subject of the regulatory negotiation;
however, because he does not represent an interest that will be
affected by the rulemaking, he was not selected. Horgan and Pollard
were nominated by a commenter; RSPA agrees that they are well qualified
to represent the interests of state safety enforcement agencies on the
Committee. However, the number of state representatives on the
Committee is necessarily limited. Both Horgan and Pollard have been
invited to participate as alternate members and on working groups that
the Committee may establish to make recommendations on technical
issues. Nelson was nominated by a commenter to represent the interest
of state regulatory agencies. RSPA agrees that state regulatory
agencies should be represented on the Committee. However, RSPA believes
that the Committee should also reflect geographic diversity. Since many
of the members selected are from the western United States, RSPA
decided to select a representative of a state regulatory agency--Bureau
of Liquefied Petroleum Gas Inspections/Florida Department of
Agriculture and Consumer Services--from an eastern state.
Persons not selected as members of the Committee will have ample
opportunities to participate in the negotiated rulemaking process. For
example, RSPA expects that the Committee will establish one or more
technical working groups to offer advice and recommendations on
specific issues. Further, there will be opportunities for non-members
to speak or provide written comments at meetings of the Committee. RSPA
encourages all those who are interested in this rulemaking to take
advantage of these opportunities to assure that the Committee considers
their views.
One commenter recommended that committee membership be determined
on a proportional basis, so that those interests having what they
believe to be the most at stake in the rulemaking would be allotted the
most representatives on the committee. RSPA does not agree and believes
that this comment stems from a fundamental misunderstanding of the
negotiated rulemaking process. A negotiated rulemaking is intended to
be an inclusive process that affords all the interests that will be
significantly affected by a rulemaking an opportunity to contribute to
development of a consensus regulation. Each member of a negotiated
rulemaking committee speaks for the interest he represents and has an
equal voice in the process of negotiating towards consensus. The key to
success for a negotiated rulemaking is to assure that all the interests
that may be affected are represented.
This commenter also suggested that representatives of the propane
industry could also adequately represent companies that transport both
propane and other liquefied compressed gases. RSPA does not agree.
Transportation of anhydrous ammonia in MC 330 and MC 331 CTMVs presents
safety and operational issues that differ from those involved with the
transportation of propane. For this reason, RSPA believes that
companies that transport anhydrous ammonia have an interest in the
negotiated rulemaking that is distinct and separate from the interest
of propane transporters and should, therefore, have separate
representation.
[[Page 38458]]
Similarly, RSPA believes that companies that transport liquefied
compressed gases other than propane and anhydrous ammonia are a
distinct and separate interest and should have separate representation
on the Committee.
Several commenters recommended that a university transportation
institute be included as a member of the Committee and specifically
suggested the Pennsylvania Transportation Institute (PTI). These
commenters believe that a transportation institute could be a valuable
source of unbiased technical information and assistance. RSPA agrees.
However, a transportation institute does not represent an interest that
would be significantly affected by the rulemaking. It would, therefore,
not be appropriate for a transportation institute to participate as a
member of the Committee. RSPA expects that the Committee will gather
information from a variety of sources and will encourage the Committee
to consult with any organizations that can provide relevant data and
technical information.
III. Participation by Non-Members
Meetings of the advisory committee will be open to the public so
that individuals who are not part of the Committee may attend and
observe. Any person attending the Committee meetings may address the
Committee if time permits or file statements with the Committee.
IV. Key Issues for Negotiation
In its notice of intent, RSPA tentatively identified major issues
that should be considered in this negotiated rulemaking and asked for
comment concerning the appropriateness of these issues for
consideration and whether other issues should be added. These issues
were:
A. Prevention of Unintentional Releases
The Committee should examine possible preventive measures to reduce
or eliminate the incidence of unintentional releases during unloading.
For example, some commenters to the Advanced Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (ANPRM) issued under Docket No. RSPA-97-2718 (HM-225A) [62
FR 44059] on August 18, 1997, have suggested that RSPA adopt a rigorous
hose management system that assures that delivery hoses and lines meet
high standards for quality, strength, and durability, and that requires
periodic examination and testing to assure continued suitability for
use in the transfer of high risk hazardous materials. Advocates of such
a system say that it could significantly reduce the number of unloading
incidents related to failures in hoses or hose assemblies. Similarly,
the Committee should consider whether there are preventive measures,
such as daily inspections or periodic testing, that should be
implemented for other parts of the cargo tank delivery system,
including pumps, valves, and piping.
B. Detection of Unintentional Releases
Preventive measures alone cannot assure the safety of cargo tank
unloading operations. Despite the best efforts of the industry and the
government, incidents will occur, and unintentional releases of high
risk hazardous materials such as propane or anhydrous ammonia will
occur. The Committee thus should consider methods to assure that
unintentional releases can be detected and controlled. One such
detection method is provided by the current regulatory requirement for
continual visual observation of the cargo tank throughout the unloading
process. Alternatives that have been suggested include remote
monitoring and signaling systems, such as sensors, alarms, and
electronic surveillance equipment, or ``patrolling'' whereby the person
attending the unloading operation moves between the storage tank and
the cargo tank to assure that each is monitored periodically throughout
the unloading process.
C. Mitigation of Unintentional Releases
Once a leak has been detected, methods to prevent catastrophic
consequences are critical. A passive system for shutting down unloading
when a leak has been detected operates automatically, that is, without
human intervention. Examples include excess flow valves, which are
intended to close the internal self-closing stop valve if the flow rate
exceeds a threshold level, and thermal links, which are intended to
close the internal self-closing stop valve if the temperature reaches a
threshold level. A remote system provides a means to shut down cargo
tank unloading operations using a mechanical device that is located on
the CTMV but away from the valve(s) that it operates. Many CTMVs have
remote mechanical shut-offs located near the vehicle cab. The remote
shut-off may be manually activated. An off-truck electro-mechanical
remote system includes a portable device that can shut down cargo tank
unloading operations away from the CTMV. In many instances, an off-
truck electro-mechanical remote is manually activated, although some
systems default to the fail-safe mode under certain circumstances. The
Committee should evaluate alternatives with a view towards determining
which methods or combination of methods provide the most cost-effective
means for controlling unintentional releases during cargo tank
unloading operations.
V. Comments on Issues List
In response to the notice of intent, one person submitted comments
on the issues involved in the regulatory negotiation. The commenter
suggested that, in addition to the issues outlined in the notice of
intent, the Committee should consider: (1) Defining an acceptable hose
life and specific inspection pressures for hoses; (2) alternatives to
the current attendance requirements; (3) specific requirements for off-
truck remote systems; and (4) limiting the types of fittings and valves
used directly on cargo tank walls to malleable steel or ductile iron
construction for vessels in propane service. RSPA agrees that the first
three issues should be considered by the Committee and notes that hose
management, monitoring of unloading operations, and off-truck remotes
are all included in the issues list in the notice of intent. However,
RSPA does not agree that the issue of the material used for fittings or
valves located directly on cargo tank walls should be included in the
issues that will be considered by the Committee. This rulemaking is
concerned only with operational issues related to unloading of MC 330
and MC 331 CTMVs and with the components of a CTMV's emergency
discharge system. General issues related to cargo tank design and
construction are more properly the subject of a separate rulemaking.
This recommendation will be considered as part of RSPA's docket HM-213.
VI. Procedure and Schedule
Staff support for the advisory committee will be provided by RSPA
and the facilitator, and meetings will take place in Washington, D.C.,
unless agreed otherwise by the Committee.
Consistent with FACA requirements, the facilitator will prepare
summaries of each Committee meeting. These summaries and all documents
submitted to the Committee will be placed in the public docket for this
rulemaking.
As stated in the Notice of Intent, the Committee's objective is to
prepare a report containing an outline of its recommendations for a
notice of proposed rulemaking with suggestions for specific preamble
and regulatory language based on the Committee's recommendations, as
well as information relevant to a regulatory evaluation and an
evaluation of the impacts of the proposal on small
[[Page 38459]]
businesses. One commenter recommended that the Committee's final
product be a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), with the Committee
reaching consensus on the language of the NPRM and preamble. RSPA
believes that this is a decision that the Committee should make as it
develops ground rules and timetables for its deliberations.
The negotiation process will proceed according to a schedule of
specific dates that the Committee devises at its first meeting on July
28-29, 1998. RSPA will publish notices of future meetings in the
Federal Register. RSPA anticipates that the Committee will meet for up
to five two-day sessions beginning in July 1998. If the Committee
establishes working groups to support its work, additional meetings for
the working groups may be necessary. RSPA expects the Committee to
reach consensus and prepare a report recommending a proposed rule
within six months of the first meeting. RSPA expects to publish an NPRM
based on the Committee's recommendations by February 15, 1999, and a
final rule by May 1, 1999. If unforeseen delays in the anticipated
schedule occur, the Research and Special Programs Administrator may
agree to an extension of time if the consensus of the Committee is that
additional time will result in agreement.
VII. Meeting Agenda
The first meeting of the negotiated rulemaking committee will begin
at 9:30 a.m. on July 28 with consideration of Committee ground rules,
procedures, and calendar. The Committee will then address the specific
issues that should be included in the negotiation and how data to
support its deliberations will be developed. In addition, the Committee
will consider whether to establish working groups to provide technical
support and recommendations for specific aspects of the negotiations.
The first meeting will conclude at 4:00 p.m. on July 29.
Title 41 CFR Sec. 105-54.301 requires that notices of advisory
committee meetings must be published at least 15 calendar days prior to
a meeting. However, that section also permits less than 15 days notice
of a meeting in exceptional circumstances provided that the reasons for
doing so are included in the meeting notice published in the Federal
Register. RSPA determined that an early date for the first meeting was
necessary because the agency timeframe for publication of an NPRM is
very short. The temporary regulation that is an issue in this
rulemaking expires on July 1, 1999. RSPA was unable to provide 15 days'
notice for the first meeting because of delays in contacting potential
committee members to confirm their interest in participating. However,
RSPA indicated in its June 4 notice of intent that the first meeting of
the committee would be scheduled for July 1998. Additionally, RSPA
provided a tentative meeting schedule that included the July 28-29
meeting date at the June 23-24 public meeting. Thus, representatives of
the identified interests were informed of the meeting date well in
advance of the 15 day period. RSPA expects that all Committee members
will be present for this first important meeting.
Issued in Washington, DC on July 14, 1998 under authority
delegated in 49 CFR Part 1.
Alan I. Roberts,
Associate Administrator for Hazardous Materials Safety, Research and
Special Programs Administration.
[FR Doc. 98-19108 Filed 7-15-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-60-P
