[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 133 (Friday, July 11, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 40590-40618]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing 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:
[email protected], or Renouf Publishing Company Ltd., 812
Proctor Ave., Ogdensburg, NY 13669, telephone: 1-888-551-7470,
email: [email protected]. 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: http://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 http://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
``[email protected].'' 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