[Federal Register: December 30, 1996 (Volume 61, Number 251)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 68955-68961]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[[Page 68955]]
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Research and Special Programs Administration
49 CFR Parts 171, 172, 173 and 175
[Docket No. HM-224A; Notice No. 96-26]
RIN 2137-AC92
Prohibition of Oxidizers Aboard Aircraft; Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
AGENCY: Research and Special Programs Administration (RSPA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: RSPA proposes to amend the Hazardous Material Regulations to
prohibit the carriage of oxidizers, including compressed oxygen, in
passenger carrying aircraft and in Class D compartments on cargo
aircraft. This proposal specifically analyzes the prohibition of
oxidizers in Class D cargo compartments. RSPA plans to issue a
supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking further analyzing the
prohibition on the carriage of oxidizers aboard passenger carrying
aircraft in Class B and C cargo compartments. RSPA is also proposing to
add a shipping description to the Hazardous Materials Table for
chemical oxygen generators and to require approval of a chemical oxygen
generator that is transported with its means of initiation attached.
These requirements would apply to foreign and domestic aircraft
entering, leaving, or operating within the United States. The purpose
of these proposals is to enhance air transportation safety.
DATES: Comments must be received by February 28, 1997.
ADDRESSES: Address comments to the Dockets Unit, Research and Special
Programs Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, room 8421,
400 Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC 20590-0001. Comments should
identify the docket number and be submitted in five copies. Persons
wishing to receive confirmation of receipt of their comments should
include a self-addressed, stamped postcard. The Dockets Unit is located
in the Department of Transportation headquarters building (Nassif
Building) at the above address on the eighth floor. Public dockets may
be reviewed there between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John A. Gale, Office of Hazardous
Materials Standards, (202) 366-8553, Research and Special Programs
Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street
SW, Washington DC 20590-0001; or Gary Davis, Office of Flight
Standards, (202) 267-8166, Federal Aviation Administration, U.S.
Department of Transportation, 800 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington
DC 20591.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) is investigating
the May 11, 1996, crash of a passenger-carrying aircraft which resulted
in 110 fatalities. Preliminary evidence indicates that chemical oxygen
generators were carried as cargo on board the aircraft and may have
caused or contributed to the severity of the accident. On May 24, 1996,
RSPA published an interim final rule (IFR) in the Federal Register (61
FR 26418) under Docket HM-224 which temporarily prohibits the offering
for transportation and transportation of chemical oxygen generators as
cargo aboard in passenger carrying aircraft. The period for submitting
comments on the interim final rule in Docket HM-224 closed July 23,
1996. After completing evaluation of the comments received, and the
risks posed by oxygen generators, RSPA will issue a final rule under
Docket HM-224 to make the prohibition permanent, terminate or modify
the prohibition, or otherwise amend provisions of the Hazardous
Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171 through 180) that apply to
oxygen generators. The proposal in this NPRM for amendments to 49 CFR
171.11 and 172.101 are based on the existing (temporary) prohibition
against transporting chemical oxygen generators as cargo aboard
passenger carrying aircraft. These proposals may be modified in a final
rule, as appropriate, to consider the further final rule to be issued
under Docket HM-224.
On May 31, 1996, NTSB issued two recommendations to RSPA, as
follows:
In cooperation with the Federal Aviation Administration,
permanently prohibit the transportation of chemical oxygen generators
as cargo on board any passenger or cargo aircraft when the generators
have passed their expiration dates, and the chemical core has not been
depleted. (Class I, Urgent Action) (A-96-29)
In cooperation with the Federal Aviation Administration, prohibit
the transportation of oxidizers and oxidizing materials (e.g., nitric
acid) in cargo compartments that do not have fire or smoke detection
systems. (Class I, Urgent Action) (A-96-30)
The actions proposed in this notice are responsive, in part, to the
NTSB recommendations and are based on RSPA's preliminary assessment of
the hazards posed by oxidizers. In its recommendations to RSPA, the
NTSB cited three previous incidents in which oxidizers caused fires
aboard aircraft. In each of these incidents, there were apparent or
known serious violations of the HMR. RSPA and FAA are not aware of any
fire aboard an aircraft having been caused directly by transport of
oxidizers in conformance with the HMR. However, RSPA and FAA agree with
the NTSB that, in certain circumstances, oxidizers can contribute to
the severity of a fire and may pose an unreasonable risk when
transported in inaccessible cargo compartments which are not required
to be equipped with fire or smoke detection systems or fire suppression
(i.e., fire-extinguishing) systems.
II. Cargo Compartments Aboard Aircraft
Various design features incorporated into a cargo compartment's
design are intended to control or extinguish any fire which might occur
in that compartment. Under the Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR),
cargo compartments are classified into five categories, Classes A, B,
C, D, and E (see 14 CFR 25.857). In brief, a Class A compartment is one
which is easily accessible in flight and in which the presence of a
fire would be easily discovered by a crewmember. A Class B compartment
is one in which any part of the compartment is accessible in flight to
a crewmember with a hand held fire extinguisher and has an approved
smoke detector or fire detector system. A Class C compartment is not
accessible but has an approved smoke detector or fire detector system,
an approved built-in fire-extinguishing system, means to control
ventilation so that the extinguishing agent can control any fire that
may start within the compartment, and means to exclude hazardous
quantities of smoke, flames or extinguishing agent from any compartment
occupied by crew or passengers.
A Class D compartment is not accessible but is one in which a fire
occurring in it will be completely confined without endangering the
safety of the airplane or the occupants, ventilation is controlled so
that any fire likely to occur will not progress beyond safe limits,
compartment volume does not exceed 1,000 cubic feet, and there are
means to exclude hazardous quantities of smoke, flames or noxious gases
from any compartment occupied
[[Page 68956]]
by crew or passengers. A Class D compartment is not required to have a
fire or smoke detection system or a fire suppression system. Its design
is intended to confine and control the severity of a fire. It generally
is not sealed sufficiently to extinguish a fire, but is designed to
limit air flow enough to prevent a significant fire. For a compartment
of 500 cubic feet (cu. ft.) or less, an air flow of 1500 cu. ft. per
hour (three air exchanges per hour) is acceptable.
A Class E compartment is one used on cargo-only aircraft which has
an approved smoke or fire detection system, means to shut off the
ventilating airflow and means to exclude hazardous quantities of smoke,
flames or noxious gases from the flight crew compartment.
III. Oxidizers Under the HMR
Under the HMR, an oxidizer (Division 5.1) is a material that may,
generally by yielding oxygen, cause or enhance the combustion of other
materials (see 49 CFR 173.127). Materials in Division 5.1 are
subdivided into Packing Groups I, II, or III, a relative ranking
corresponding to high, moderate or low risks posed by the material.
Packing groups are assigned to specifically named materials in the
Sec. 172.101 Hazardous Materials Table (Table). For generic entries,
such as ``Oxidizing solid, n.o.s.'' (``n.o.s.'' means ``not otherwise
specified''), packing groups are assigned by analogy with existing
entries in the Table for liquids, and by test results for solids.
Certain gases (Class 2), most notably oxygen, are also oxidizers under
the HMR and, even though they are not classed as such, they are
required to be identified with the OXIDIZER or OXYGEN label.
IV. Oxidizers Aboard Aircraft
Liquid oxidizers in Packing Group I are very reactive and have the
ability to initiate and substantially intensify fires. These materials
are forbidden for transportation by passenger-carrying aircraft and are
permitted only in restricted quantities aboard cargo-only aircraft.
Most oxidizers will not initiate fires when spilled or released, but
will intensify fires from other sources. Many of these materials are
permitted for transport aboard passenger-carrying and cargo-only
aircraft. When transported by aircraft, these materials are subject to
per package quantity limits specified in the Table, and to aircraft
quantity limits specified in Sec. 175.75.
Oxidizers currently authorized for transportation by aircraft in
Class D cargo compartments generally will not initiate a fire. The
potential hazard posed by them is that, if a fire were to occur
elsewhere in the compartment, in the absence of a fire suppression
system, the fire may burn long enough to involve the oxidizer. The
oxidizer would then provide an oxygen-enriched environment which could
intensify the fire and override the limited safety features of the
compartment.
In the absence of a fire caused by another source, oxidizers
currently authorized for air transportation and offered in conformance
with the HMR present very little risk to aircraft, crew or passengers.
The threat of a serious risk arises from the mixing of oxidizers with
baggage and other cargo which are potential sources of fire. Over the
past twenty years, virtually all fires aboard aircraft in passenger
baggage or cargo involved forbidden materials or serious violations of
the HMR.
V. Prohibition of Oxidizers Aboard Aircraft in Class D Cargo
Compartments
Knowledge of the May 11, 1996, crash has increased awareness of the
hazards posed by hazardous materials in transportation, and increased
the vigilance on the part of the public, airlines, commercial shippers
and the Federal Government. While this should result in fewer instances
involving transportation of forbidden materials aboard aircraft, fires
initiated by forbidden materials in passenger baggage and cargo likely
will not be totally eliminated. Further, because Class D cargo
compartments are not required to be equipped with smoke or fire
detection systems or fire-extinguishing systems, oxidizers could become
involved in and substantially intensify a cargo compartment fire
thereby contributing to the severity of an incident and, possibly, the
loss of life and property. For these reasons, RSPA and FAA agree with
the NTSB recommendation to prohibit the transportation of oxidizers in
cargo compartments that do not have fire or smoke detection systems.
Therefore, RSPA proposes to amend Sec. 175.85 to prohibit the loading
or transportation in a Class D cargo compartment of a package for which
an OXIDIZER or OXYGEN label (see Secs. 172.426 and 172.405) is required
under Subpart E of Part 172. These restrictions would apply to both
foreign and domestic aircraft entering, leaving or operating in the
United States.
The proposed prohibition against transportation of oxidizers as
cargo in Class D compartments (and the possible expansion of this
proposed prohibition to Class B and C compartments, as discussed in
Part VI, below) would not affect the exception in 49 CFR 175.10(a)(7)
for operator-supplied oxygen for a passenger's use during flight.
However, in this NPRM, RSPA is proposing an editorial change to this
section to clarify that this exception applies only to oxygen provided
for use by an onboard passenger and does not allow the air carrier to
transport medical oxygen devices as cargo in order to move them to the
locations where they will be needed, at a later time, for use by
passengers.
At the present time, a passenger's own medical oxygen cylinder may
be transported as cargo on passenger-carrying aircraft in compliance
with the HMR, but the passenger's own cylinder may not be transported
in the passenger cabin. 49 CFR 175.85(a). If RSPA ultimately prohibits
the carriage of all oxidizers, including gaseous oxygen, in Class B, C,
and D compartments on passenger-carrying aircraft, a passenger would
not be able to ship its own medical oxygen on the same airplane. The
passenger would have to arrange for another supply of oxygen at
destination, rather than using a cylinder that the passenger owns.
FAA supports a complete removal of oxidizers from passenger-
carrying aircraft, as proposed, but also believes that, if it is
necessary to allow a passenger to transport its own oxygen cylinder for
use at destination, it is far safer to stow the cylinder in the
passenger cabin, under the control of and accessible to the airline
crew, than in an inaccessible cargo compartment. FAA does not believe
that it is prudent to allow for the carriage of compressed oxygen in an
inaccessible Class D compartment. It believes that, if an oxygen
cylinder is involved in a fire, the release of oxygen will intensify
the fire. Because the Class D cargo compartment does not contain
detection or suppression devices and because it is inaccessible to
crew, a fire that might otherwise be survivable has an increased risk
of becoming fatal. Thus, FAA believes that it would be safer to carry
personal medical oxygen cylinders in the cabin because the crew could
quickly remove the cylinders from any fire area in the cabin. This is
in contrast to the complete inability of the crew to remove compressed
oxygen from an inaccessible Class D cargo compartment.
RSPA expressly invites comments on this and any other alternatives
(to completely prohibiting passenger-owned oxygen cylinders) that would
accommodate passengers with breathing difficulties that need their own
supply of oxygen at destination. These comments should indicate
whether, and how many, passengers actually ship their own medical
oxygen cylinders on
[[Page 68957]]
the same airplane in order to have a supply of oxygen at their
destination.
RSPA also invites air carriers to submit comments on the effect of
the prohibition on current practices of using passenger-carrying
aircraft to ``stage'' or position the oxygen cylinders that airlines
provide to passengers with breathing difficulties for use during flight
under 49 CFR 175.10(a)(7). The proposed prohibition would have the
effect of requiring air carriers to ship their own cylinders by ground
transportation or by cargo-only aircraft, rather than using their own
passenger-carrying aircraft to move these devices to locations for
passenger use.
FAA is working on a related action to require that Class D
compartments be clearly marked so that cargo-handling personnel will be
able to recognize them.
RSPA and FAA have tentatively determined that the costs of the
requirements of this proposal would be $25 million over ten years ($17
million, present value). RSPA and FAA have also tentatively determined
that the benefits of this proposal will outweigh the costs if it saves
nine or more lives over the next ten years.
VI. Prohibition of Oxidizers As Cargo on All Passenger Carrying
Aircraft
RSPA is proposing to extend the prohibition on oxidizers to Class B
and C aircraft cargo compartments, effectively prohibiting the carriage
of oxidizers on passenger carrying aircraft. RSPA plans on issuing an
SNPRM further developing and analyzing this part of our proposed rule
in the very near future. Although the proposal has not been fully
developed, it is being proposed in this document for two reasons: (1)
we would like to take advantage of the intervening time to seek public
comment that can be used in development of the SNPRM; to the extent
that commenters can very quickly provide us with their comments and
supporting data, we will consider them in developing the SNPRM; and (2)
e believe that, in preparing comments on the prohibition in ``D''
compartments, commenters should consider the possibility that any final
rule could include a prohibition on all passenger carrying aircraft.
VII. Oxygen Generators: Shipping Description and Small Personal
Oxygen Generators
A. Shipping Description
Currently, under the HMR, the most appropriate shipping description
or an oxygen generator (chemical) containing sodium chlorate as the
primary constituent is ``Oxidizing solid, n.o.s., 5.1, UN1479, II.''
RSPA does not believe that this name adequately describes an oxygen
generator. In particular, the name does not communicate to an air
carrier the fact that the material is not authorized on passenger
carrying aircraft. Therefore, consistent with changes recently adopted
into the International Civil Aviation Organizations Technical
Instructions for the Transport of Dangerous Goods By Air, RSPA proposes
to add the following description to the Hazardous Materials Table
(Table) ``Oxygen generator, chemical, 5.1 UN3353, II.'' RSPA also is
roposing to revise Secs. 171.11, 171.12, and 171.12a to require the
use of the new name in international transportation.
The second sentence of proposed Sec. 171.11(d)(14) and the word
``Forbidden'' in Column 9A of the proposed Table entry for ``Oxygen
generator, chemical'' are based on the existing (temporary) prohibition
against transporting chemical oxygen generators aboard passenger-
carrying aircraft. These proposals may be modified in a final rule, as
appropriate, to consider the further final rule to be published under
Docket HM-224. The UN identification number assigned to the proposed
shipping name ``Oxygen generator, chemical'' in the Table may be
revised if the UN Committee of Experts on the Transport Of Dangerous
Goods adopts a different identification number in its Recommendations
on the Transport of Dangerous Goods.
In addition, RSPA believes that the hazards posed by an oxygen
generator, chemical that is shipped with its means of initiation
attached require special approval. Therefore, consistent with the
prohibitions and conditions specified in Sec. 173.21, RSPA is proposing
a separate requirement that oxygen generator, chemical that is shipped
with its means of initiation attached must: (1) be classed and approved
by the Associate Administrator for Hazardous Materials Safety; (2)
incorporate at least two safety features that will prevent
unintentional activation of the generator; and (3) when transported by
air, be contained in a packaging prepared and originally offered for
transportation by the approval holder. RSPA is also proposing to
require that each shipper of an approved oxygen generator have a copy
of the approval and that the approval number be marked on the outside
of the package.
B. Small Personal Oxygen Genenerators
In the interim final rule RSPA published under Docket HM-224, RSPA
prohibited the transportation of oxygen generators by passenger
carrying aircraft. An exception was provided for personal oxygen
generators that meet the conditions of Sec. 175.10(a)(24). Section
75.10(a)(24) requires that the person carrying the oxygen generator
receive the approval of the operator of the aircraft and that the
personal oxygen generators conform to the following: (1) a six foot
drop test without loss of contents or activation; (2) be equipped with
at least two positive means of preventing unintentional activation; (3)
be well insulated, and when actuated the temperature on any external
surface does not exceed 212 degrees Fahrenheit; (4) be in the
manufacturer's original packaging which must include a sealed outer
wrapping or clear evidence that the generator has not been tampered
with; and (5) be marked to indicate conformance with
Sec. 175.10(a)(24).
In its comments to the interim final rule, the Air Line Pilots
Association (ALPA) requested that the exception for small personal
oxygen generators in Sec. 175.10(a)(24) be removed. Though
Sec. 175.10(a)(24) requires passengers to notify operators when there
are oxygen generators in their baggage, ALPA stated that an aircraft
operator has no way of knowing that these small chemical oxygen
generators are being carried in a passenger's checked baggage because
there are no public awareness programs or procedures for notifying
passengers that passengers are to contact operators before they offer
bags containing generators as checked baggage. ALPA also stated that
there is no realistic way to know when or that the person who purchased
or who intends to carry oxygen generators has been educated in the
proper way to inspect and maintain them as specified in the HMR. ALPA
went on to say that there is no way for an operator to examine the
units to verify that a passenger is in compliance with these
requirements. ALPA also pointed out that the Civil Aviation Authority
of the United Kingdom has banned personal oxygen generators on
passenger-carrying aircraft.
RSPA believes that adequate public notice and comment should be
provided before the exception in Sec. 175.10(a)(24) is removed.
Therefore, RSPA is proposing, in this NPRM, to remove the exception
provided in Sec. 175.10(a)(24) for small personal oxygen generators.
VIII. Request for Additional Comments
RSPA requests any available information concerning the costs and
benefits of this proposed action. RSPA is requesting information
concerning the hazards posed by oxidizers in aircraft cargo
compartments that have fire detection or suppression systems. Please
[[Page 68958]]
provide detailed cost information to RSPA as to the manner by which you
would incur costs as the result of the proposed ban of oxidizers
including all germane monetary and qualitative cost information. RSPA
also solicits comments from those foreign operators who would incur
costs as the result of this proposal. Although our evaluation has not
been able to determine any apparent cost impact on cargo aircraft
carriers, RSPA recognizes there could, nonetheless, be a potential cost
impact. As the result of this concern, RSPA solicits information from
cargo aircraft operators who find they would incur costs from
implementation of the proposed rule. Potentially impacted shippers are
asked to provide detailed information on the manner by which they would
incur costs.
There may also be adverse impacts on airlines if they routinely use
passenger-carrying aircraft to transport, as cargo, oxygen cylinders
which are normally installed on aircraft and must be periodically
retested or refilled. RSPA has not assessed the costs associated with
prohibiting the shipment of oxygen cylinders on passenger carrying
aircraft. Therefore, RSPA requests any available information concerning
the costs and benefits of banning oxygen cylinders, as cargo, aboard
passenger carrying aircraft. Please provide detailed information as to
the manner by which you would incur costs. In particular, RSPA is
requesting information on the number of cylinders of oxygen which are
transported each day on passenger carrying aircraft. What is the
typical size of these containers? What other means of transportation
are available? What are the cost differences to the airlines for using
these other means of transportation?
By limiting the prohibition on oxidizers to packages required to be
labeled OXIDIZER and OXYGEN, the prohibition would not apply to
oxidizers classed as consumer commodities, ORM-D, under the provisions
of Sec. 173.152, or as consumer commodities, Class 9, as permitted
under Sec. 171.11. RSPA requests comments regarding whether it would be
appropriate to extend this prohibition to consumer commodities which
are oxidizers or whether quantity limits should be imposed on these
materials in Sec. 175.75.
IX. Future Rulemaking
RSPA, in coordination with FAA, has initiated a study to assess the
risks associated with the transportation of hazardous materials in
aircraft cargo compartments. As an initial step, RSPA held a meeting in
Cambridge, Massachusetts on October 22, 1996, for purposes of
identifying accident scenarios, probabilities of occurrence, and
expected consequences. In attendance were representatives from the
NTSB, FAA, Air Transport Association, Chemical Manufacturers
Association, Air Line Pilots Association, International Air Line
Passenger Association and several aircraft manufacturers. Based on the
outcome of this study, RSPA may initiate a rulemaking to ban additional
hazardous materials. RSPA requests comments regarding whether it would
be appropriate to extend this prohibition to other materials which may
pose hazards similar to oxidizers, such as organic peroxides. Comments
are requested as to the costs and benefits of these possible actions.
X. Regulatory Analyses and Notices
Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures
This proposed rule is considered a significant regulatory action
under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 and was reviewed by the
Office of Management and Budget. The rule is considered significant
under the regulatory policies and procedures of the Department of
Transportation (44 FR 11034). A preliminary regulatory evaluation is
available for review in the public docket.
Executive Order 12612
This proposed rule has been analyzed in accordance with the
principles and criteria contained in Executive Order 12612
(``Federalism''). The Federal hazardous materials transportation law
(49 U.S.C. 5101-5127) contains an express preemption provision that
preempts State, local, and Indian tribe requirements on certain covered
subjects. Covered subjects are:
(i) the designation, description, and classification of hazardous
material;
(ii) the packing, repacking, handling, labeling, marking, and
placarding of hazardous material;
(iii) the preparation, execution, and use of shipping documents
pertaining to hazardous material and requirements respecting the
number, content, and placement of such documents;
(iv) the written notification, recording, and reporting of the
unintentional release in transportation of hazardous material; or
(v) the design, manufacturing, fabrication, marking, maintenance,
reconditioning, repairing, or testing of a package or container which
is represented, marked, certified, or sold as qualified for use in the
transportation of hazardous material.
Because RSPA lacks discretion in this area, preparation of a
federalism assessment is not warranted. Title 49 U.S.C. 5125(b)(2)
provides that DOT must determine and publish in the Federal Register
the effective date of Federal preemption. That 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.
This proposed rule would require oxidizers to be transported in certain
types of cargo compartments aboard aircraft. RSPA solicits comments on
whether the proposed rule would have any effect on State, local or
Indian tribe requirements and, if so, the most appropriate effective
date of Federal preemption.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
I certify that this proposed rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This
proposed rule applies to air carriers, most of whom are not small
entities.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This proposed rule does not propose any new information collection
requirements.
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 publishes the Unified Agenda in
April and October of each year. The RIN number contained in the heading
of this document can be used to cross-reference this action with the
Unified Agenda.
List of Subjects
49 CFR Part 171
Exports, Hazardous materials transportation, Hazardous waste,
Imports, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
49 CFR Part 172
Hazardous materials transportation, Hazardous waste, Labeling,
Marking, Packaging and containers, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
49 CFR Part 173
Hazardous materials transportation, Packaging and containers,
Radioactive materials, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
Uranium.
49 CFR Part 175
Air carriers, Hazardous materials transportation, Radioactive
materials, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
[[Page 68959]]
In consideration of the foregoing, 49 CFR Parts 171, 172, 173 and
175 would be amended as follows:
PART 171--GENERAL INFORMATION, REGULATIONS, AND DEFINITIONS
1. The authority citation for part 171 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101-5127; 49 CFR 1.53.
2. In Sec. 171.11, paragraph (d)(14) is added to read as follows:
Sec. 171.11 Use of ICAO Technical Instructions.
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(14) An oxygen generator (chemical) must be classed, approved, and
described in accordance with the requirements of this subchapter.
Except as provided in Sec. 175.10(a)(7) of this subchapter, oxygen
generators (chemical) may not be transported on passenger carrying
aircraft (see Sec. 173.21 of this subchapter).
3. In Sec. 171.12, paragraph (b)(17) is added to read as follows:
Sec. 171.12 Import and export shipments.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(17) An oxygen generator (chemical) must be classed, approved, and
described in accordance with the requirements of this subchapter.
* * * * *
4. In Sec. 171.12a, paragraph (b)(16) is added to read as follows:
Sec. 171.12a Canadian shipments and packagings.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(16) An oxygen generator (chemical) must be classed, approved, and
described in accordance with the requirements of this subchapter.
PART 172--HAZARDOUS MATERIALS TABLE, SPECIAL PROVISIONS, HAZARDOUS
MATERIALS COMMUNICATIONS, EMERGENCY RESPONSE INFORMATION, AND
TRAINING REQUIREMENTS
5. The authority citation for part 172 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101-5127; 49 CFR 1.53.
6. In the Sec. 172.101 Hazardous Materials Table, the following
entry is added in appropriate alphabetical order:
Sec. 172.101 Purpose and use of hazardous materials table.
* * * * *
[[Page 68960]]
Section 172.101.--Hazardous Materials Table
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hazardous (8) Packaging authorizations (Sec. 173.***) (9) Quantity limitations (10) Vessel stowage
materials Hazard ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- requirements
Symbols (1) descriptions and class or Identification PG (5) Label Codes Special Passenger -------------------------------
proper shipping division numbers (4) (6) provisions (7) Exceptions (8A) Nonbulk (8B) Bulk (8C) aircraft/ rail Cargo aircraft Location (10A) Other
names (2) (3) (9A) only (9B) (10A) (10B)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
.............. Oxygen generator, l5.1 UN3353........... I.............. 5.1............ 57............. None........... 211............ None.......... Forbidden..... 15 kg......... D............. 56, 58, 69,
chemical. 106
.............. .................. .......... ................. II............. 5.1............ 57............. None........... 212............ None.......... Forbidden..... 25 kg......... D............. 56, 58, 69,
106
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 68961]]
7. In 172.102, in paragraph (c)(1), Special Provision 57 is added
to read as follows:
Sec. 172.102 Special provisions.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(1) * * *
57 An oxygen generator, chemical that is shipped with its means
of initiation attached must: (1) be classed and approved by the
Associate Administrator for Hazardous Materials Safety; (2)
incorporate at least two safety features that will prevent
unintentional activation of the generator; and (3) when transported
by cargo-only aircraft, be contained in a packaging prepared and
originally offered for transportation by the approval holder. Each
offerer of an approved oxygen generator must have a copy of the
approval, and the approval number must be marked on the outside of
the package.
* * * * *
PART 173--SHIPPERS--GENERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR SHIPMENTS AND
PACKAGINGS
8. The authority citation for Part 173 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101-5127, 44701; 49 CFR 1.45, 1.53.
Sec. 173.21 [Amended]
9. In Sec. 173.21, in paragraph (k), the words ``or
Sec. 175.10(a)(24)'' are removed.
PART 175--CARRIAGE BY AIRCRAFT
10. The authority citation for Part 175 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101-5127; 49 CFR 1.53.
Sec. 175.10 [Amended]
11. In Sec. 175.10, in paragraph (a)(7), the wording ``a
passenger'' is revised to read ``an onboard passenger'' and paragraph
(a)(24) is removed and reserved.
12. In Sec. 175.85, paragraph (d) is added to read as follows:
Sec. 175.85 Cargo location.
* * * * *
(d) No person may load or transport in a Class D cargo compartment,
as defined in 14 CFR 25.857(c), a package containing a hazardous
material for which an OXIDIZER or OXYGEN label is required under
Subpart E of Part 172 of this subchapter (see Sec. 172.426 or
Sec. 172.405 of this subchapter, respectively).
* * * * *
Issued in Washington, DC on December 20, 1996, under the
authority delegated in 49 CFR part 106.
Alan I. Roberts,
Associate Administrator for Hazardous Materials Safety.
[FR Doc. 96-33035 Filed 12-27-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-60-P
|
