Voglio sapere a riguardo di…

43872

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 151 / Tuesday, August 10, 2021 / Proposed Rules
was originally intended. This change would simply result in a package being tested in line with the design of the original packaging test method.
Section 178.703
Section 178.703 outlines the marking requirements for intermediate bulk containers IBCs. PHMSA proposes to amend two marking requirements in this Section.
In paragraph b6, which specifies additional marking requirements for composite IBCs, the amendment would specify that the required markings on inner receptacles of these packagings must either be readily visible while in the outer casing or duplicated on the outer casing to facilitate inspection verifying compliance with the applicable package performance standard marking requirements.
In paragraph b7, which outlines the marking requirements for IBCs that are designed to be stacked, PHMSA
proposes to revise language in paragraph b7iv to clarify the maximum stacking load requirements pertaining to each marking requirement.
Currently paragraph b7iv indicates that the maximum permitted stacking load applicable when the IBC is in use, must be displayed. PHMSA has determined that this phrase may be misinterpreted to mean that the stacking load applies only to transportation, leading to these packagings being stacked inappropriately when not in transportation, such as in warehouse storage. PHMSA proposes to remove the words applicable when the IBC is in use, to clarify that stacking loads should never be exceeded whether in transportation or in storage. PHMSA has determined that clarifying the regulatory text regarding the proper use of these packagings will provide an enhanced level of safety both during transport and during storage.

jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS4

Section 178.705
Section 178.705 prescribes specifications for metal IBCs. Paragraph c outlines construction requirements and paragraph c1iv specifies the minimum wall thickness requirements for metal IBCs. Metal IBCs are currently the only type of IBCs for which there are minimum wall thickness requirements, which is likely a holdover from regulations for cubical tank containers, from which the metal IBCs were once derived.32 In contrast, because of 32 Stainless Steel Container Association, Proposal on Minimum Wall Thickness for Metal IBCs Submitted to the Sub-Committee of Experts on the Transport of Dangerous Goods During the 54th Session Sep. 7, 2018, https www.unece.org/

VerDate Sep<11>2014

19:16 Aug 09, 2021

Jkt 253001

performance testing requirements i.e., drop, stack and vibration ability to demonstrate the integrity of the package, the 21st revised edition of the UN
Model Regulations include an amendment which now provides that minimum wall thickness requirements apply only to metal IBCs that have a capacity of more than 1500 L 396
gallons, while metal IBCs with a volume of 1500 L or less are no longer subject to previous prescriptive minimum wall thickness requirements.
Therefore, PHMSA proposes to revise the minimum wall thickness requirements for metal IBCs with a volume of 1500 L or less to provide additional design and construction flexibility with regards to IBC designs.
This amendment would harmonize with the 21st revised edition of the UN
Model Regulations. PHMSA solicits comments on the following safety and economic impacts regarding this proposed amendment:
Does the reliance on the performance testing system and the elimination of a prescriptive minimum wall thickness for metal IBCs with a capacity of 1500 L or less present an unnecessary safety risk e.g., reduced corrosion protection, ability to prevent punctures or ruptures resulting from conditions normally incident to transportation? Explain.
Do manufacturers primarily use a reference steel or are other steels commonly used? If so, which ones?
If the minimum thickness requirement were removed for metal IBCs with a capacity of 1500 L or less, what calculations will the manufacturers use to determine the design minimum thickness for the IBCs made from the reference steel?
What is an approximate number of metal IBC design types and the number of IBCs manufactured in accordance with these design types that could reasonably expected to be in transportation?
What is the expected cost savings from the removal of a minimum wall thickness requirement for IBCs at or below the proposed 1500 L capacity?
What are the expected impacts of not harmonizing HMR requirements for metal IBCs with a capacity of 1500 L or less?
As an alternative to the proposed rule, PHMSA is also considering a change to 171.23, which prescribes requirements for specific materials and packagings transported under incorporated international standards to prohibit transportation or offering for fileadmin/DAM/trans/doc/2018/dgac10c3/ST-SGAC.10-C.3-2018-96e.pdf.

PO 00000

Frm 00030

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4702

transportation of metal IBCs with a capacity of 1500 L or less when that transportation is made in accordance with the ICAO Technical Instructions, IMDG Code, Transport Canada TDG
Regulations, or the IAEA Regulations.
PHMSA also solicits comments on that potential prohibition.
G. Part 180
Section 180.207
Section 180.207 outlines the requirements for the requalification of UN pressure receptacles. Paragraph d specifies the requalification procedures for various types of UN cylinders but, consistent with historical approach of the UN Model Regulations, does not include any procedures for the periodic inspection of UN cylinder bundles.
However, the 21st revised edition of the UN Model Regulations addressed that gap by adding a new reference document entitled ISO 20475: 2018
Gas cylindersCylinder bundles Periodic inspection and testing. ISO
20475 provides detailed procedures for maintenance and periodic inspection of cylinder bundles.
PHMSA proposes to add paragraph d7 to reference ISO 20475:2018, Gas cylindersCylinder bundlesPeriodic inspection and testing to provide a requalification standard for UN cylinder bundles because requalification procedures may differ for bundles of cylinders versus individual cylinders.
This document was developed based on the need for a standard specific to cylinder bundles which would allow them to be reintroduced into service for an extended period of time. PHMSA
expects that incorporating by reference a safety standard for requalification will reduce business costs and environmental effects by allowing existing cylinders to be reintroduced into service for continued use. As a participant on the UNSCOE, this standard was reviewed by PHMSA and other international bodies for inclusion in the UN Model Regulations based on its need and safety merit. Incorporating by reference ISO 20475 in the HMR is necessary, not only for international harmonization, but also to address the lack of such a standard in the HMR.
Additionally, PHMSA proposes to remove a reference to the outdated, third edition of ISO 10462E, Gas cylindersTransportable cylinders for dissolved acetylenePeriodic inspection and maintenance in paragraph d3 used for the requalification of dissolved acetylene cylinders. Requalification is required in accordance with the third edition of ISO
10462:2013E; however, requalification
E:FRFM10AUP4.SGM

10AUP4