
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 173 (Friday, September 6, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 54775-54788]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-21627]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

46 CFR Part 98

[Docket No. USCG-2011-0088]
RIN 1625-AB63


Bulk Packaging To Allow for Transfer of Hazardous Liquid Cargoes

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is amending its regulations concerning the 
transfer of hazardous materials to and from bulk packaging on vessels. 
The Coast Guard is expanding the list of bulk packaging approved for 
hazardous material transfers to include International Maritime 
Organization (IMO) Type 1 and Type 2 portable tanks, United Nations 
(UN) portable tanks, and Intermediate Bulk Containers (IBCs). The Coast 
Guard is also expanding the list of allowed hazardous materials to 
provide greater flexibility in the selection and use of packaging in 
the transportation of hazardous materials. This rule will eliminate the 
need to obtain special permits or Competent Authority Approvals to use 
IMO Type 1 or Type 2 portable tanks, UN portable tanks, or IBCs.

DATES: This final rule is effective December 5, 2013. The incorporation 
by reference of certain publications listed in the rule is approved by 
the Director of the Federal Register on December 5, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Comments and material received from the public, as well as 
documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, 
are part of docket USCG-2011-0088 and are available for inspection or 
copying at the Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of 
Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New 
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., 
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. You may also find this 
docket on the Internet by going to http://www.regulations.gov, 
inserting USCG-2011-0088 in the ``Search'' box, and then clicking 
``Search.''

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule, 
call or email LT Tiffany Duffy, Hazardous Materials Standards Division, 
telephone 202-372-1403, email Tiffany.A.Duffy@uscg.mil. If you have 
questions on viewing the docket, call Barbara Hairston, Program 
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202-366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents for Preamble

I. Abbreviations
II. Regulatory History
III. Background
IV. Discussion of Comments and Changes
    A. IBC Standards
    B. Manifolds
    C. General Comments
    D. Clerical Edits
V. Incorporation by Reference
VI. Regulatory Analyses
    A. Regulatory Planning and Review
    B. Small Entities
    C. Assistance for Small Entities
    D. Collection of Information
    E. Federalism
    F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    G. Taking of Private Property
    H. Civil Justice Reform
    I. Protection of Children
    J. Indian Tribal Governments
    K. Energy Effects
    L. Technical Standards
    M. Environment

I. Abbreviations

AAHMS Associate Administrator for Hazardous Material Safety
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
DOT Department of Transportation
FR Federal Register
IBC Intermediate Bulk Container
IBC Code International Bulk Chemical Code
IM Intermodal
IMDG Code International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code
IMO International Maritime Organization
MAWP Maximum allowable working pressure
MPT Marine Portable Tank
NAICS North American Industry Classification System
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
NTTAA National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
OMB Office of Management and Budget
OSV Offshore Supply Vessel
PHMSA Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
SBA Small Business Administration
U.S.C. United States Code
UN United Nations

II. Regulatory History

    On March 9, 2012, we published in the Federal Register (77 FR 
14327) a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) titled Bulk Packaging to 
Allow for Transfer of Hazardous Liquid Cargoes. We received five 
comment letters on the proposed rule, containing a total of 10 
comments. No public meeting was requested and none was held.

III. Background

    In this final rule, we are amending 46 CFR subparts 98.30 and 
98.33, which contain regulations concerning the transfer of hazardous 
materials to and from bulk packaging on vessels. These packagings are 
primarily portable tanks used by offshore supply vessels (OSVs) to 
transport hazardous materials to and from offshore platforms involved 
in the exploration and production of oil and natural gas. (In this 
document ``packaging'' is a generic reference to portable tanks and 
IBCs.)
    Several types of portable tanks exist and are used by the industry 
in various capacities. Intermodal (IM) 101 and 102 portable tanks are 
older types of portable tanks that have not been manufactured since 
before 2003. However, pursuant to Pipeline and Hazardous Materials 
Safety Administration (PHMSA) regulations in 49 CFR 173.32, existing IM 
101 and 102 tanks may continue to be used as long as they comply with 
all required specifications and are inspected regularly (see 49 CFR 
173.32(c)(2)). Similarly, marine portable tanks (MPTs), which are tanks 
that meet the requirements of 46 CFR part 64 and were approved by the 
Coast Guard before September 30, 1992, are also permitted by PHMSA 
regulations (see 49 CFR 173.32(c)(3)).
    International Maritime Organization (IMO) Type 1 and Type 2 
portable tanks are newer portable tanks that comply with specifications 
in the International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code (IMDG Code), section 
4.2.0.1, which became effective in 2003. IMO Type 1 tanks are fitted 
with pressure-relief devices with a maximum allowable working pressure 
(MAWP) of 1.75 bar and above, while IMO Type 2 tanks are fitted with 
pressure-relief devices with an MAWP between 1.0 and 1.75 bar. The IMDG 
Code also contains specifications for other types of tanks, which are 
not discussed in this rule.
    A United Nations (UN) portable tank, as used in this regulation, is 
an intermodal tank having a capacity of greater than 450 liters (118.9 
gallons) (see definition in 49 CFR 171.8). The term is defined in 46 
CFR 98.30-3 to mean a tank that complies with the regulations in 49 CFR 
178.274, ``Specifications for UN Portable Tanks,'' and 178.275, 
``Specification for UN

[[Page 54776]]

Portable Tanks intended for the transportation of liquid and solid 
hazardous materials.'' These regulations contain additional 
requirements for the construction of tanks that meet UN specifications. 
We note that this definition differs from the common use of the phrase 
``UN portable tanks,'' which can be used to refer to any portable tank 
that meets any specification in the IMDG Code.
    Intermediate Bulk Containers (IBCs) are rigid or flexible portable 
packaging, other than a cylinder or portable tank, which are designed 
for mechanical handling (see definition in 49 CFR 171.8). Regulations 
for IBCs are prescribed in 49 CFR 178, subpart N, ``IBC Performance-
Oriented Standards.'' As IBCs are not generally designed for 
transportation of hazardous material, their use is limited more than 
portable tanks.
    In order to be used for transportation of hazardous materials, 
portable tanks and IBCs must comply with both Coast Guard regulations 
in Title 46 of the CFR and Department of Transportation (DOT) PHMSA 
regulations in Title 49. Currently, the regulations in Title 46 only 
contain provisions for three classes of portable tanks: MPTs, IM 101 
and 102 portable tanks, and portable tanks authorized for hazardous 
liquid materials by the Associate Administrator for Hazardous Materials 
Safety (AAHMS). This has led to a situation where operators who wish to 
use newer types of portable tanks or IBCs must apply for a special 
permit from PHMSA. This rulemaking updates Title 46 to permit newer 
portable tanks and some IBCs to be used without special approval.

IV. Discussion of Comments and Changes

    In response to the publication of the NPRM, the Coast Guard 
received five comment submissions from the public, with a total of 10 
distinct comments. The comments can be broadly divided into these three 
categories: IBC standards, manifolds, and general comments on the rule.

A. IBC Standards

    One set of commenters focused on perceived shortcomings in the 
design of IBCs as compared to UN portable tanks and IMO tanks, and how 
the standards for IBCs could be made more rigorous to improve their 
safety. In making these comments, commenters suggested a variety of 
improvements that could be made to IBCs that would improve the level of 
safety when using these containers with hazardous liquid cargoes.
    We believe that some of these comments may have resulted from an 
unclear paragraph in the NPRM. Under section IV of the NPRM, titled 
``Discussion of Proposed Rule,'' there was a brief subsection 
describing proposed changes to 46 CFR 98.30-6: ``Vessels Carrying 
IBCs.'' That subsection read as follows:

    ``This section would be added to describe the types of IBCs the 
Coast Guard would allow for the carriage of certain hazardous 
materials on board a vessel, and to make clear the requirements the 
IBCs would have to meet to gain approval from the Coast Guard. We 
would allow the use of an IBC only if the IBC is equivalent to, or 
greater in standards than, an authorized IMO Type 1 or IMO Type 2 
portable tank, or a UN portable tank. (77 FR 14327, at 14330),'' 
(emphasis added)

    The above excerpt provides a general description of the precepts of 
the regulatory text in section 98.30-6, and describes the minimum 
construction requirements that metal IBCs must meet in order to be 
approved by the Coast Guard to be used with certain hazardous liquid 
cargoes. The regulatory text contains specifications based on 
recommendations from PHMSA and Coast Guard engineering staff governing 
shell thickness, relief valves, closures on fill openings, and venting 
requirements that we believe comprise minimum safety requirements 
necessary in a maritime environment. We believe that if an IBC meets 
those specifications, and is used in accordance with all other 
applicable regulations, it is safe to use in a capacity for which it is 
designed. In this final rule, we are finalizing the revisions proposed 
in the NPRM with only minor changes.
    Many of the commenters on the proposed rule raised questions and 
offered suggestions relating to the bolded portion of the subsection 
quoted above. These comments are addressed below.
    One comment asked how the Coast Guard would determine that an IBC 
was equivalent to, or greater in standards than, an authorized IMO Type 
1 or 2 or a UN Portable tank, as stated in the NPRM. The commenter 
stated that there might be individuals who attempted to capitalize on 
``grey areas'' of the regulations. This commenter also suggested that 
inspecting these IBCs could pose a burden on the Coast Guard in 
determining equivalence.
    In response, we are clarifying in the final rule preamble what we 
mean by the statement that IBCs would be allowed if they are equivalent 
to, or greater than, an IMO Type 1 or 2 tank, or a UN Portable tank. 
The statement should not be interpreted to mean that there is a 
subjective test relating to safety. Instead, as stated above, the Coast 
Guard has determined that certain IBCs can be safely used if they meet 
the standards set forth in 46 CFR 98.30-6, are used in a manner 
compliant with all other regulations, and are only used with cargoes 
for which they are rated. The statement in the NPRM referenced by the 
commenter does not create an alternative means of compliance that 
deviates from the published regulations.
    One commenter stated that, as the intent of this rule is to 
authorize IBCs for hazardous liquid cargo transfers only if the IBC is 
equivalent to, or greater in standards than, an authorized IMO or UN 
Portable Tank, MAWP of the authorized IBC should be similar to IMO or 
UN Portable Tanks.
    We are not planning to make any specific changes to the regulatory 
text in response to this comment. Fundamentally, IBCs are not 
equivalent in design and construction to either IMO or UN Portable 
Tanks, and we did not intend to use this rulemaking action to revamp 
IBC standards. While our intent in this rulemaking is to ensure that 
the operation and use of IBCs is at a level of safety similar to the 
use of IMO and UN Portable Tanks, the types of containers have 
different design and construction requirements and are used in 
different ways. With regard to IBCs, existing transport regulations 
(e.g., those in 49 CFR part 173) prohibit the use of IBCs not capable 
of operating under the pressure specified for the intended cargo or 
application. We do not believe that it is necessary to require that 
IBCs meet the (varying) MAWP requirements of any of the portable tanks.
    The commenter also stated that in order to achieve a similar level 
of safety, the IBC piping as required in proposed Sec.  98.30-13(a)(3) 
should be to the higher standard of IMO Type 1 and Type 2 tanks and UN 
Portable tanks. The commenter stated that this would include the 
requirement of an internal valve with a shear section and a means of 
remote closure. Again, we note that we are not requiring IBCs to meet 
all the design specifications of IMO tanks and UN Portable tanks. We 
believe that IBCs can be used safely in the limited uses for which they 
are designed if they meet the applicable requirements and are used in 
accordance with regulatory and design standards, such as those in 49 
CFR 173.35 (Hazardous Materials in IBCs). We do not believe it is 
prudent to redefine IBCs in such a way as to perform as substitutes for 
UN portable tanks.
    One commenter stated that if the intent of the proposed rule is to 
create safer packages in relative volumes, IBCs

[[Page 54777]]

lack safety features in the discharge piping area that exist in the IMO 
and UN-portable type containers. While we agree that IBCs lack the 
safety features contained in some portable tanks, we believe that they 
can be used safely if the IBCs meet the requirements set forth in Sec.  
98.30-6, and are used in accordance with regulatory standards in Titles 
46 and 49 of the CFR, as well as the manufacturers' design standards. 
Again, we note that the use of IBCs is more limited than that of IMO 
and UN portable tanks.
    One commenter stated that if IBCs are authorized, there should be 
some specific verbiage regarding specialized lifting points, although 
the commenter did not suggest any specific language. In response, we 
note that there are current regulations in 49 CFR 178.704 that address 
the matter of lifting points for IBCs. Specifically, this section 
requires that ``[a]ny lifting or securing features of an IBC must be of 
sufficient strength to withstand the normal conditions of handling and 
transportation without gross distortion or failure and must be 
positioned so as to cause no undue stress in any part of the IBC.'' (49 
CFR 178.704(c)) However, in order to enhance the clarity of our 
regulations, we have added text to Sec.  98.30-9 that draws attention 
to the current requirements for lifting points in regards to IBCs.

B. Manifolds

    A manifold is a chamber or system of pipes having several outlets 
in which a liquid or gas can be gathered or from which a liquid or gas 
can be distributed to packagings connected to each outlet. Manifolds 
are used to transfer hazardous and non-hazardous liquids and gases in 
both maritime and land-based applications. The advantage of a manifold 
is that it enables the simultaneous filling of multiple packagings, 
although the use of a manifold can increase the danger of inadvertent 
discharges without additional safety equipment. Using a manifold for a 
transfer involves attaching a pump to the storage tank, connecting the 
manifold to the pump, connecting two or more packagings to the 
manifold, monitoring the transfer, and breaking down the setup. This 
rulemaking only addresses manifolds used in the transfer of hazardous 
materials to or from a vessel.
    An alternative to the manifold-multiple IBC for transferring 
hazardous material to or from a vessel is the sequential fill method. 
This method consists of multiple iterations of connecting a packaging 
to the pump, connecting the pump to the storage tank, monitoring the 
transfer, and breaking down the connections.
    Currently, there are no regulations that address the use of 
manifolds in conjunction with packaging for the transfer of hazardous 
materials to or from vessels, and thus they are used in some 
operations. In proposed Sec.  98.30-13(b) of the NPRM, the Coast Guard 
proposed to prohibit the use of manifolds when transferring a hazardous 
material to or from a packaging onboard a vessel. In the NPRM, we 
stated that, ``[m]anifolds would be prohibited because the use of a 
manifold is a manual operation and the emergency shutoff during the 
transfer to and from a portable tank or IBC should be automatic. This 
would minimize the loss of hazardous materials in the event of an 
emergency, thereby reducing risk to health and environment.'' (77 FR 
14330)
    Two commenters made recommendations on the NPRM's proposed 
prohibition of manifolds. One commenter simply stated that the 
prohibition was a good idea and that the use of manifolds should not be 
allowed. On the other hand, one commenter recommended that this 
prohibition be removed in the final rule. The commenter argued that the 
use of a manifold eliminates the requirement to make or break multiple 
tank connections, and that each connection is an opportunity for 
injury.
    The commenter that recommended removing the prohibition noted that 
manifolds are currently in use by industry. Ending the use of manifolds 
for vessel transfers would have required their current users to shift 
to filling the packaging sequentially. This method requires more labor 
effort and, as noted by the commenter, presents additional 
possibilities for injuries.
    Based on the arguments made in the comments, we have re-evaluated 
our position regarding the use of manifolds for vessel transfers of 
hazardous materials. We agree with the commenter's analysis that, in 
terms of reducing the need to make and break tank connections, the use 
of a manifold alleviates the potential for some injuries associated 
with those practices. It is also obviously less expensive to transfer 
material to multiple packages using a manifold rather than filling each 
package sequentially. However, we are concerned about the potential for 
loss of hazardous material during a transfer. The commenter proposing 
use of manifolds also suggested that the automatic shutdown of the 
transfer can be accomplished via the pump emergency shutdown control. 
We agree that this is sufficient protection for sequential transfer 
involving a single packaging. However, a transfer using a manifold is a 
more complex operation with multiple packagings, hoses, and 
connections, and a shutdown of the pump alone may not stop a discharge 
of hazardous material.
    Because a manifold has connection points with many packages, if a 
discharge of hazardous material is observed, it may be unclear where in 
the system that discharge is occurring. Thus, all connections must be 
turned off in order to guarantee that the discharge is stopped. If a 
system has a large number of connections, each requiring manual 
shutoff, then a large amount of time can elapse before all the 
connections are turned off--resulting in a large discharge of hazardous 
materials. Conversely, if all packaging units connected to the system 
are equipped with automatic shutoff devices, there is no extra time 
associated in shutting down a large number of connections to a manifold 
compared to shutting down only two connections in a single tank to tank 
transfer. For that reason, we believe that the use of shutoff valves on 
each item of packaging attached to a manifold adequately addresses the 
concerns regarding discharges of hazardous materials.
    Therefore, instead of the total prohibition proposed in the NPRM, 
we are revising Sec.  98.30-13 to allow the use of manifolds for the 
transfer of hazardous materials to or from a vessel only when all 
attached packaging units are equipped with an automatic shutoff valve 
or other automatic means of closure \1\ that will activate during an 
emergency. We note that this restriction will not have any effect on 
the use of manifolds with portable tanks, as all portable tanks are 
already required by existing regulations to be equipped with automatic 
shutoff valves.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Hereinafter we use ``shutoff valve'' to refer to both 
shutoff valves and other automatic closure devices.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. General Comments

    One commenter supported the proposed changes to the regulation, 
stating that the reduction in time and expense to submit and process 
waiver requests is a positive change, and will create no reduction in 
safety. We appreciate the support.
    One commenter suggested that there is a misprint in Sec.  98.33-
1(b)(4), under applicability. The commenter suggested that a reference 
to standards for metal IBCs should refer to Sec.  98.30-6, instead of 
Sec.  98.30-5. We agree that this is a clerical error, and are 
correcting it in this final rule.

[[Page 54778]]

    One commenter suggested that instead of references to specific 
standards in the existing IMDG Code, the Coast Guard should add a 
general phrase to its regulations requiring tanks to comply with 
standards set forth in the most current version of the IMDG Code. We 
are not planning on making this change. Regulations governing 
incorporations by reference (see 1 CFR 51) do not allow for 
incorporation in this manner. Furthermore, while we recognize that 
updating the regulations via the notice and comment process can result 
in the use of older versions of the Code for periods of time, we 
believe it is necessary to give notice to the public that the new 
standard is being adopted and allow public input on the best way to 
implement new international agreements into U.S. regulations.
    One commenter requested that the language ``any cargo listed in the 
IBC Code requiring vessels to meet the standards of the IBC Code for 
Ship Type 2 or Ship Type 3'' be included in the table in Sec.  98.30-
7(a), which lists hazardous materials authorized for transfer to and 
from portable tanks. The commenter stated that this was justified 
because the cargo tank protection requirements found in the IBC Code 
(2.6.2.2) provide the same level of cargo protection that is required 
of the UN and IMO portable tanks and the IBCs if allowed to transport 
Ship Type 2 cargoes. We disagree with the premise of this comment. The 
IBC Code relates to tank vessel design, and is not appropriate for 
regulations concerning intermediate bulk containers, which are 
considered packages under 49 CFR subchapters A-C.

D. Clerical Edits

    This final rule also contains some additional minor clerical edits. 
In Sec.  98.30-2(a), the office and address has been updated. In Sec.  
98.30-3, ``IBC'' has been moved to the first definition per 
alphabetical order, and the paragraph lettering before each definition 
has been removed. In redesignated Sec. Sec.  98.30-7(g), 98.30-11, and 
98.30-13(a), the words ``on board'' have been replaced with 
``onboard.'' In redesignated Sec.  98.30-16, the office name has been 
updated. In redesignated Sec.  98.30-18(b)(1), quotation marks have 
been fixed. In Sec.  98.30-37, the phrase ``Coast Guard approved'' has 
been changed to ``Coast Guard-approved'' and the numerals ``2'' and 
``3'' were changed to ``two'' and ``three.'' In Sec.  98.33-3(c), the 
office name has been updated. In Sec.  98.33-15, citations have been 
updated to reflect redesignated sections in subpart 98.30.

V. Incorporation by Reference

    The Director of the Federal Register has approved the material in 
46 CFR 98.30-2 for incorporation by reference under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 
1 CFR part 51. Copies of the material are available from the sources 
listed in that section.

VI. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and 
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses 
based on these statutes or executive orders.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 (``Regulatory Planning and Review'') and 
13563 (``Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review'') direct agencies 
to assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives 
and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that 
maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, 
public health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). 
Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both 
costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of 
promoting flexibility.
    This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f) 
of Executive Order 12866, as supplemented by Executive Order 13563, 
Regulatory Planning and Review, and does not require an assessment of 
potential costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of E.O. 12866. The 
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has not reviewed it under E.O. 
12866. Nonetheless, we developed an analysis of the costs and benefits 
of the rule to ascertain its probable impacts on industry. A final 
Regulatory Assessment follows:

      Table 1--Summary of Affected Population, Costs, and Benefits
------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Category                            Final rule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicability.....................  Allows the use of IMO Type 1 and IMO
                                     Type 2 portable tanks, UN portable
                                     tanks, and IBCs for use in
                                     transferring hazardous materials
                                     onboard vessels.
Affected population...............  402 owners and operators of 1,334
                                     OSVs
Industry costs (10-year,            Costs: $51,050
 undiscounted).                     Cost Savings: $78,780
                                    Net Savings: $27,730
Benefits..........................   Efficiency gains to
                                     industry by increasing the number
                                     of pre-approved types of portable
                                     tanks and expanding the list of pre-
                                     approved hazardous materials they
                                     can transport.
                                     Reduces regulatory burden
                                     to industry and government by
                                     reducing the number of special
                                     permits or Competent Authority
                                     Approvals to be processed and
                                     harmonizing the Coast Guard
                                     regulations with PHMSA's HMR
                                     regulations.
                                     Minimizes risk of release
                                     of hazardous material during
                                     transfer by requiring shutoff valve
                                     for manifold use.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Allowable Portable Tanks and Pre-Approved Hazardous Materials
    In the NPRM published on March 9, 2012, in the Federal Register (77 
FR 14327), we proposed amendments to the rules covering the transfer of 
hazardous materials on vessels that would expand the lists of allowable 
portable tanks and pre-approved hazardous materials. We estimated total 
savings resulting from the relief from requirements to obtain permits 
for IMO Type 1 and Type 2 portable tanks and IBCs would be $7,897 per 
year, discounted at a 7 percent interest rate. This was based on the 
assessment that, as the inspection and tagging requirements would 
remain unchanged, there would be no additional regulatory costs. We 
also estimated that the proposed rule would accrue costs savings from 
these two provisions \2\:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ For a complete description of the costs savings estimates, 
please refer to the Cost Savings section of the NPRM. (77 FR 14332-
14333)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     The NPRM proposed expanding the list of allowable portable 
tanks to include IMO Type 1 and IMO Type 2 portable tanks, UN portable 
tanks, and IBCs. Without this provision, special

[[Page 54779]]

permits are needed to use this equipment. The expansion of approved 
portable tanks reduces the burden on industry to prepare the special 
permits and the administrative burden to government to process them.
     The NPRM included an expansion of the list of pre-approved 
hazardous materials. The expansion of this list has a similar economic 
benefit as the expansion of allowable portable tanks. It reduces the 
number of special permits, which generates savings for industry and 
government.
    Table 2 reproduces the NPRM's Table IV.A.3, the summary of the 
undiscounted cost savings.

                                Table 2--Undiscounted Cost Savings From the NPRM
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  Special permit   Expansion of
                                                                   or competent       list of
                                                                     authority       hazardous         Total
                                                                     approval        materials
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year                                                                     Savings         Savings         Savings
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1...............................................................          $5,050          $7,070         $12,120
2...............................................................           5,050               0           5,050
3...............................................................           5,050               0           5,050
4...............................................................           5,050           7,070          12,120
5...............................................................           5,050               0           5,050
6...............................................................           5,050               0           5,050
7...............................................................           5,050           7,070          12,120
8...............................................................           5,050               0           5,050
9...............................................................           5,050               0           5,050
10..............................................................           5,050           7,070          12,120
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................................          50,500          28,280          78,780
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Table 3, a copy of the NPRM's Table IV.A.4, displays the cost 
savings schedule at discounted rates of 7 percent and 3 percent.

                                  Table 3--Schedule of Discounted Cost Savings
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                              Year                                 Total savings     7 percent       3 percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1...............................................................         $12,120         $11,327         $11,767
2...............................................................           5,050           4,411           4,760
3...............................................................           5,050           4,122           4,621
4...............................................................          12,120           9,246          10,768
5...............................................................           5,050           3,601           4,356
6...............................................................           5,050           3,365           4,229
7...............................................................          12,120           7,548           9,855
8...............................................................           5,050           2,939           3,987
9...............................................................           5,050           2,747           3,870
10..............................................................          12,120           6,161           9,018
    Total.......................................................          78,780          55,467          67,231
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
Annualized......................................................  ..............           7,897           7,882
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We are not aware of any information, either from the comments or 
other sources, that alters that assessment. There are no changes in 
this final rule that will alter any of the assumptions relating to this 
part of the rule. Therefore, for this final rule, we retain the NPRM's 
annualized estimate of total savings resulting from the permitting 
changes, discounted at a 7 percent rate, of $7,897.
    In summary, the benefits of these provisions are that it will 
provide greater flexibility to industry by increasing the types of 
packaging available for use, increasing the list of pre-approved 
hazardous materials they can contain, and reducing the need for special 
permits. The Government will also benefit from processing fewer 
Competent Authority Approvals. We also expect an increase in regulatory 
efficiency, as our regulations will align with international standards.
2. Modification to the Proposed Prohibition of Manifolds
    (a) Manifold provision.
    As previously discussed in section V, ``Discussion of Comments and 
Changes'', we are not finalizing a provision in the NPRM that would 
have prohibited the use of manifolds in the transfer of hazardous 
materials to or from a vessel. Instead, in this final rule, we decided 
to continue to allow the use of a manifold with packaging equipment, as 
long as each packaging attached to the manifold is equipped with a 
shutoff valve. Accordingly, we incorporate the cost of complying with 
this new requirement into the economic analysis of this final rule.
    Table 4 summarizes the current practices with respect to 
transferring material from packaging and assesses the required change 
under the final rule.

[[Page 54780]]



                  Table 4--Comparison and Cost Implications of Baseline and Post-Rule Practices
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Baseline practice        Post-rule practice
           Packaging type                (onshore transfer)        (onboard transfer)       Change in practice
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Portable Tanks......................  Sequential Fill.........  Allowed................  No change.
                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      Manifold................  Allowed with shutoff     No change: Portable
                                                                 valve.                   tanks already equipped
                                                                                          with shutoff valves.
IBC (Allowed by special permit for    Sequential Fill.........  Allowed................  No change.
 transport).
                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      Manifold with shutoff     Allowed................  No change.
                                       valve.
                                     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      Manifold without shutoff  Manifold with shutoff    Cost for shutoff valve.
                                       valve.                    valve.                  Cost for Additional
                                                                Sequential fill........   labor.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The only vessel operators that will incur costs under the final 
rule are users of IBCs, not equipped with shutoff valves, who are 
currently accomplishing transfers using a manifold. These operators 
have the option of installing a shutoff valve and continuing to use a 
manifold or use the sequential fill method resulting in additional 
labor to connect and disconnect packaging. In the remainder of this 
section we estimate the cost and benefit analysis of the manifold 
provision of this final rule.
    (b) Cost of a shutoff valve.
    We note that many IBCs come equipped with shutoff valves. One 
example is the PHMSA Special Permit ``SP4212'' standard, a commonly-
used design specification for IBCs used in intermodal commerce. A 
review of industry Web sites indicates that shutoff valves are readily 
available on the commercial market.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Hoover Solutions--(http://www.partresource.com/index.php/by-types/valves.html).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    From a web search, we found examples of shutoff valves with 
prices.\4\ The only difference in the examples was the size of the pipe 
opening, which ranged from 1.25 inches to 3 inches. To obtain a unit 
purchase cost estimate, we calculated the average of the lowest and 
highest prices, which was $1,015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Dultmeier Sales, http://www.dultmeier.com/catalog/0.689.2495.3926.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Our estimate of the loaded wage rate for a pump operator is $34 per 
hour.\5\ We estimate that it would take 10 minutes to install a shutoff 
valve. The installation cost is approximately $6 ((10/60) * $34, 
rounded). Valves are expected to have a similar lifespan to the tanks 
for which they are used. Therefore, it is our expectation that a 
shutoff valve will last the life of the IBC in question. The total 10-
year cost for a shutoff valve is $1,021, consisting of $1,015 to 
purchase the unit plus $6 for installation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ http://www.bls.gov/oes/oes_dl.htm, May 2011 data, 
occupation 53-7027, pump operators, except well-head, h-hour column 
in national cross-industry data file, the average wage is $22.31 per 
hour. We calculated a load factor of 1.52 from the June 2011 
employee compensation data for production, transportation, and 
material moving occupations--total compensation $24.20/wages and 
salaries $15.96 (ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/ocwc/ect/ececqrtn.pdf, p. 27).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (c) Additional labor costs to sequentially fill IBCs.
    The sequential fill option involves additional labor costs 
associated with connecting and disconnecting. The additional costs of 
the sequential filling of IBCs are dependent on a number of variables, 
such as capacity of the IBC, the speed of the pump accomplishing the 
transfer, and the amount of hazardous material being transferred. The 
following analysis estimates costs based on a set of reasonable 
assumptions regarding these inputs. The inputs are:
     Labor cost of $34 per hour, as used to calculate the 
installation time.
     Labor times: We estimate the following times for these 
tasks:
     Connect or disconnect a portable tank or IBC to pump, 10 
minutes.
     Set-up or break-down pump-manifold configuration, 15 
minutes.
     Connect or disconnect an IBC to a manifold, 5 minutes.
     Equipment characteristics:
     Capacity of the IBCs: One vendor offers IBCs that range 
from 125 to 550 gallons \6\ and another has one with a 630 gallon (15 
barrel) \7\ capacity. For this scenario we use a mid-range capacity of 
300 gallons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Hoover Container Solutions, http://www.hooversolutions.com/caged-poly-ibc.html.
    \7\ Magnum Mud Equipment Company, Mangum Dual Purpose 155 Barrel 
IBC tank, http://www.magnummud.com/eqt_certified_transport_tanks_dual_15bbl.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Pump Speed: From a web search, we found pumps with speeds 
from 37 gallons per minute (GPM) \8\ to 1,200 GPM.\9\ For this scenario 
we will use a pump rated at 50 gallons per minute, under the assumption 
that the lower speed offers more control of the transfer. This results 
in a fill time of 6 minutes (300 gallons/50 gallons per minute).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Air diaphragm pump from Magnum Mud Equipment Co., http://www.magnummud.com/eqt_pumps_M2.htm.
    \9\ Centrifugal pump from Magnum Mud Equipment Co., http://www.magnummud.com/eqt_pumps_6x8.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     The total amount to be transferred is 1,500 gallons. 
Applying the earlier input of IBCs with a 300 gallon capacity, the 
transfer will need five IBCs (1,500 total/300 gallons per IBC).
    For the analysis, we divided the transfer into these tasks:
     Connect to pump: For the manifold method, this task 
consists of connecting the manifold to the pump. For the sequential 
fill method, the IBC is connected to the pump.
     Connect to manifold: The task applies only the manifold 
method; the IBCs are connected to the manifold.
     Disconnect from manifold: When the transfer is completed 
using the manifold method, the IBCs are disconnected from the manifold.
     Disconnect from pump: The equipment that was directly 
connected to the pump is disconnected. For the manifold method this is 
the manifold and for the sequential fill method it is the IBC.
    We applied the inputs described above to these tasks to estimate 
total times under both the manifold and sequential fill methods. Table 
5 displays the results of these calculations.

[[Page 54781]]



                       Table 5--Task Analysis of 1,500 Gallon Transfer, Values in Minutes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Manifold-IBC method                   Sequential fill method
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Task                     Time        Number       Total         Time        Number       Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Connect to Pump...................           15            1           15           10            5           50
Connect to Manifold...............            5            5           25          N/A  ...........            0
Disconnect from Manifold..........            5            5           25          N/A  ...........            0
Disconnect from Pump..............           15            1           15           10            5           50
    Total Equipment...............  ...........  ...........           80  ...........  ...........          100
Transfer time.....................  ...........  ...........            6  ...........  ...........           30
                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total Time....................  ...........  ...........           86  ...........  ...........          130
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For this scenario, the additional time for the sequential fill 
method is 44 minutes (130-86). Using the loaded wage rate of $34 per 
hours, this yields an additional cost per transfer of $25 ((44/60)* 
$34).
    (d) Cost to industry.
    Based on Coast Guard estimates in the NPRM, there are approximately 
50 IBCs currently in use on OSVs.\10\ Based on publicly available 
information from vendors and relevant trade associations, we do not 
have information on how many IBCs used by the OSV industry currently 
use manifolds for transfers or how many of the IBCs are currently 
equipped with shutoff valves. Further, we do not have information on 
how many operators will chose to comply by installing a shutoff valve 
or employ the sequential fill method. We did not receive any 
information in the public comments for the NPRM on these issues.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ This is a rounding of the 45 IBCs in the ``Cost Savings'' 
section of the NPRM, 77 FR 14332,
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For the purposes of this regulatory analysis, Table 6 presents a 
sensitivity analysis of total cost to industry at quartile assumptions 
of current usage of shutoff valves. Key inputs are total IBC population 
of 50 from the NPRM and the unit cost of $1,021 as derived above.

          Table 6--Sensitivity Analysis of Shutoff Valve Costs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Number and percent of IBCs currently     IBCs needing
           with shutoff valves            shutoff valves       Cost
------------------------------------------------------------------------
50 (100 percent)........................               0              $0
37 (74 percent).........................              13          13,275
25 (50 percent).........................              25          25,525
12 (24 percent).........................              38          38,798
0 (0 percent)...........................              50          51,050
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As Table 6 shows, the maximum cost to industry would be $51,050 if 
all IBCs chose to install shut-off valves. The sequential fill method 
involves an additional labor cost of $25 per transfer. It would require 
41 transfers ($1,021 divided by $25) over the 10-year period of 
analysis before the cost of the additional labor exceeds the cost of 
the shutoff valve.
    (e) Benefits.
    As stated in the Discussion of Comments and Changes section above, 
when using manifolds, the emergency shutoff during the transfer to and 
from a portable tank or IBC should be automatic. The use of automatic 
shutoff valves with manifolds can substantially reduce the quantities 
of hazardous materials discharged in the event of an emergency by 
quickly stopping the flow of materials from each tank.
3. Summary of Costs and Net Savings, and Benefits
    Table 7 presents the 10-year costs and net savings information 
schedule. As noted above, we have no additional information to alter 
the savings estimates presented in the NPRM regarding the expansions of 
the lists of allowable portable tanks and pre-approved hazardous 
materials. These data are presented in Table 7 in the columns labeled 
``Permit Savings'', ``HLC Savings'', and ``Total Savings''. The 
``Shutoff Valve Cost'' column adds the $51,050 cost for the shutoff 
valve in Year 1 and the ``Net Savings'' column is ``Total Savings'' 
less the ``Manifold Compliance Costs.''
    As shown in the ``Total'' row this rulemaking will produce a net 
savings of $27,730 on an undiscounted basis over 10 years.

                                                 Table 7--10-Year Schedule of Net Savings, Undiscounted
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                          Manifold
                             Year                                Permit savings      HLC savings      Total savings    compliance cost     Net savings
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.............................................................            $5,050            $7,070           $12,120           $51,050          -$38,930
2.............................................................             5,050                 0             5,050                 0             5,050
3.............................................................             5,050                 0             5,050                 0             5,050
4.............................................................             5,050             7,070            12,120                 0            12,120
5.............................................................             5,050                 0             5,050                 0             5,050
6.............................................................             5,050                 0             5,050                 0             5,050
7.............................................................             5,050             7,070            12,120                 0            12,120
8.............................................................             5,050                 0             5,050                 0             5,050

[[Page 54782]]

 
9.............................................................             5,050                 0             5,050                 0             5,050
10............................................................             5,050             7,070            12,120                 0            12,120
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.....................................................            50,500            28,280            78,780            51,050            27,730
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Table 8 presents the undiscounted data from Table 6 and adds 
discounted values using interest rates of 7 percent and 3 percent.

                      Table 8--10-Year Schedule of Net Savings, Undiscounted and Discounted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                           Year                                Net savings        7 Percent         3 Percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.........................................................          -$38,930          -$36,383          -$37,796
2.........................................................             5,050             4,411             4,760
3.........................................................             5,050             4,122             4,621
4.........................................................            12,120             9,246            10,768
5.........................................................             5,050             3,601             4,356
6.........................................................             5,050             3,365             4,229
7.........................................................            12,120             7,548             9,855
8.........................................................             5,050             2,939             3,987
9.........................................................             5,050             2,747             3,870
10........................................................            12,120             6,161             9,018
    Total.................................................            27,730             7,757            17,668
                                                           -----------------------------------------------------
Annualized................................................  ................             1,104             2,071
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Our estimates indicate that under a maximum cost scenario, the 
final rule will produce an annualized net savings of $1,104 at a 7 
percent discount rate. To the extent that companies have voluntarily 
installed shutoff valves on IBCs or decide against purchasing them 
because they find that switching to the sequential transfer method is 
more cost-efficient, the costs will be less and the net savings greater 
than the estimates presented in tables 7 and 8.
4. Summary of Benefits
    The final rule will provide greater flexibility to industry by 
increasing the number of allowable types of portable tanks available 
for use, increasing the list of pre-approved hazardous materials they 
can transport, and reducing the need for special permits. The 
Government will also benefit from processing fewer special permits or 
Competent Authority Approvals. We also expect an increase in regulatory 
efficiency, as our regulations will be better aligned with 
international standards.
    Additionally, the final rule mandates the use of shutoff valves 
with manifolds. In the event of an emergency, the shutoff valve would 
help to reduce the amount of hazardous materials spilling into the 
marine environment, while still limiting the potential for injuries 
associated with multiple attachment operations at sea that manifolds 
provide.

B. Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have 
considered whether this rule would have a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small entities'' 
comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are 
independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, 
and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000.
    As described in section VII, ``Regulatory Analyses'', the final 
rule will permit the use of manifolds only if shutoff valves are also 
installed.
    For the revenue impact analysis we assume that the cost for shutoff 
valves will be incurred by the users of IBCs. We reviewed ownership 
data of entities that lease IBCs used in the cost analyses and 
determined that all of the owners of the IBCs are businesses, none of 
which are owned by not-for-profit organizations or governments.
    Based on a search, we picked a representative sample of 77 
businesses whose inventory of portable tanks may at some time include 
the IBCs used by the OSV industry. To determine the size standards we 
used the size standards (or threshold) from the Small Business 
Administration (SBA). We used www.Manta.com to estimate revenue and 
number of employees.\11\ Table 9 provides the breakdown of businesses 
by size.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ As indicated by either their revenue or personnel data for 
businesses. We used www.Manta.com to determine size standards.

        Table 9--Number of Entities Impacted by the Proposed Rule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                   Entities                        Number     Percentage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Businesses that Exceed SBA Standards..........            4            5
Foreign owned entities........................           26           34
Small Businesses with revenue data............           26           34
Unknown, assumed Small Business \1\...........           21           27
�����������������������������������������������
    Total.....................................           77          100
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Revenue information on these 26 were not available, which are then
  considered to be small.

    Of the 77 businesses in the sample, we identified 26 as foreign-
owned entities. We found revenue data for 30 businesses, of which 4 
exceed the SBA limit and 26 qualify as small businesses. We did not 
find revenue data for 21 businesses and assume these are small, for a 
total of 47 (61 percent) small businesses in the sample. The reference 
population for the analysis consists of

[[Page 54783]]

the 26 small business for whom we found revenue data. With those 
inputs, we distributed the 50 IBCs evenly across the 26 small 
entities.\12\ Assuming that all businesses elect to install shutoff 
valves rather than use the sequential-fill method with IBCs, the 
average cost per entity is $2,042 ($1,021 per shutoff valve x 2 shutoff 
valves per entity).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Companies offering IBCs include: http://www.magnummud.com/equipment.htm, http://www.ccrcontainers.com/?q=en/product/chemicals, 
http://www.hooversolutions.com/stainless-steel-ibc-rentals.html, 
http://www.greif.com/products-services/rigid/intermediate-bulk-containers.html, http://girardequip.com/products/intermediate-bulk-containers, http://ibcresource.com/tankrentals.asp.

             Table 10--Small Entity Revenue Impact Analysis
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Number of    Percent of
                 Impact range                     entities      total
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0-1 percent...................................           25           96
1-3 percent...................................            1            4
3 percent or more.............................            0            0
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Entities are categorized by the North American Industry 
Classification System (NAICS) codes.\13\ By using SBA criteria for 
small businesses, the associated NAICS codes, and the 2007 United 
States Economic Census data,\14\ we are able to provide an overview of 
companies that lease out IBCs and manifolds. Table 11 provides the top 
5 NAICS Codes of the identified small businesses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Small business information can be accessed online at http://www.sba.gov/size/indextableofsize.html.
    \14\ U.S. Census Bureau information can be accessed online at 
http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/DatasetMainPageServlet?_program=ECN&_tabId=ECN1&_submenuId=datasets_4&_lang=en&_ts=246366688395.

                          Table 11--Top Five NAICS Codes of Identified Small Businesses
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                SBA size
                                                                threshold
         NAICS                Industry        Percentage of    (less than     SBA size standard      Number of
                                             small entities     threshold            type            entities
                                                                 small)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
322220.................  Paper Bag and                   29             500  Employees..........               8
                          Coated and
                          Treated Paper
                          Manufacturing.
314999.................  All Other                        7             500  Employees..........               2
                          Miscellaneous
                          Textile Product
                          Mills.
423830.................  Industrial                       7             100  Employees..........               2
                          Machinery and
                          Equipment
                          Merchant
                          Wholesalers.
424130.................  Industrial and                   7             100  Employees..........               2
                          Personal Service
                          Paper Merchant
                          Wholesalers.
424990.................  Other                            7             100  Employees..........               2
                          Miscellaneous
                          Nondurable Goods
                          Merchant
                          Wholesalers.
                         All Other NAICS...              43  ..............  ...................              12
                                            --------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total..............  ..................             100  ..............  ...................              28
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Some of the NAICS used dates back to 2007. NAICS 322223, 322224, and 322221 were combined to 322220.

    The analysis of the industries, as summarized in Table 11 shows 
that the companies leasing IBCs are spread across five industries.
    The Coast Guard expects that this final rule will not have a 
significant economic impact on small entities. As described in the 
regulatory analysis, this final rule will reduce regulatory burdens by 
eliminating the need for special permits or Competent Authority 
Approvals for the specified portable tanks and hazardous materials and 
thus generate an savings to the industry. Our revenue impact analysis 
shows that 96 percent of the small entities will be impacted by less 
than 1 percent.
    Therefore, the Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that 
this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities.

C. Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offered to assist small 
entities in understanding the rule so that they could better evaluate 
its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. The Coast Guard 
will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain 
about this rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal 
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal 
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory 
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory 
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and 
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to 
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR 
(1-888-734-3247).

D. Collection of Information

    This rule calls for a modification to an existing collection of 
information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-
3520). It will modify existing Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 
Collection of Information: OMB Control Number 2137-0051, ``Rulemaking, 
Special Permits, and Preemption Requirements.''
    As defined in 5 CFR 1320.3(c), ``collection of information'' 
comprises reporting, recordkeeping, monitoring, posting, labeling, and 
other similar actions. The title and description of the information 
collection, a description of those who must collect the information, 
and an estimate of the change in annual burden follow. The estimate 
covers the time for preparing or renewing special permit or Competency 
Authority Approval requests for carrying hazardous materials.
    Title: Rulemaking, Special Permits, and Preemption Requirements.
    OMB Control Number: 2137-0051.
    This collection of information applies to rulemaking procedures 
regarding PHMSA's HMR regulations. Specific areas covered in this 
information collection include 49 CFR part 105, subparts A and B, 
``Hazardous Materials Program Definitions and General Procedures;'' 49 
CFR part 106, subpart B, ``Participating in the Rulemaking Process;'' 
49 CFR part 107, subpart C, ``Preemption;'' and 49 CFR part 107, 
subpart H, ``Approvals, Registrations and Submissions.'' This rule will 
expand the types of allowed portable tanks and expand the list of 
allowed

[[Page 54784]]

hazardous materials permitted in those tanks. Under current 
regulations, the use of these tanks or the transfer of the hazardous 
materials specified would require a special permit or Competent 
Authority Approval from PHMSA's AAHMS. Under this rule, these special 
permits or Competent Authority Approvals will no longer be needed. 
Eliminating these special permits or Competency Authority Approvals 
will reduce the burden associated with the OMB Control Number 2137-0051 
by reducing the number of respondents, responses, and burden hours 
associated with special permit or Competency Authority Approval 
requests. We contacted DOT regarding this collection of information, 
and it validated our methodology and concurred that this rule will 
impact the referenced ICR. However, DOT will defer any adjustments to 
the ICR until the final rule is published.
    Summary of Collection of Information: The rule will impact the 
burden associated with 49 CFR part 107, Subpart H, ``Approvals, 
Registrations and Submissions.'' The rule will eliminate the need for 
special permit or Competent Authority Approval applications and 
therefore reduce the burden associated with that part of the 
collection. As previously stated, we contacted DOT regarding this 
collection of information.
    Need for Information: Special permit or Competent Authority 
Approval procedures provide the information required for analytical 
purposes to determine if the requested relief provides for a comparable 
level of safety as provided by PHMSA's HMR regulations.
    Use of Information: The information collected under this ICR is 
used in the review process by PHMSA in determining the merits of the 
petitions for rulemakings and for reconsideration of rulemakings, as 
well as applications for special permits or Competent Authority 
Approvals, preemption determinations and waivers of preemption 
determinations. This rule will affect special permit or Competent 
Authority Approval requests, which PHMSA's AAHMS would need to 
determine the merits and use of the unallowed tanks.
    Description of Respondents: The respondents impacted by this rule 
are owners and operators of OSVs requesting the use of unauthorized 
portable tanks as well as owners and operators of OSVs requesting 
approval to transport unauthorized hazardous material.
    Number of Respondents: The number of respondents affected by this 
ICR is 8,770. The number of respondents impacted by this rule will be 
402 owners and operators of OSVs.
    Frequency of Response: Without the rule, we estimate each 
respondent would have to provide a response every 2-5 years or one 
response per ICR renewal cycle.
    Burden of Response: The savings in burden hours per request is 
estimated at 5.5 hours (5-hour special permit or Competent Authority 
Approval requests + 0.5-hour recordkeeping).
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: Currently, the ICR annual hour 
burden is 4,219, of which 792 hours are the result of 144 special 
permit or Competent Authority Approval requests per year. As IM 101 and 
IM 102 portable tanks phase out, we expect an additional five special 
permits or Competent Authority Approvals per year over the 3-year ICR 
renewal period. This would add 27.5 future burden hours per year to the 
current 4,219 approved hourly estimate. As this rule will eliminate the 
need for these special permit or Competent Authority Approval requests, 
it will eliminate the future burden by 27.5 hours per year. We estimate 
that expanding the list of hazardous materials approved for transfer to 
and from the specified portable tanks and IBCs will eliminate the 
filing of seven special permits or Competent Authority Approvals per 3-
year ICR renewal cycle. At 5.5 hours per special permit or Competent 
Authority Approval, this will be an additional reduction of 38.5 hours 
of regulatory burden per 3-year period.
    Reason for Proposed Change: The rule will eliminate the need for 
special permit or Competent Authority Approval requests for 
unauthorized portable tanks and IBCs as well as the unauthorized 
transport of hazardous materials. As required by the Paperwork 
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)), we will submit a copy of 
this final rule to the OMB for its review of the collection of 
information. You are not required to respond to a collection of 
information unless it displays a currently valid control number from 
OMB. Before the collection requirements in this final rule can be 
enforced, OMB must approve the action of the collection of information.

E. Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, 
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the 
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the 
distribution of power and responsibility among levels of government.
    We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have determined 
that it does not have implications for federalism.

F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) 
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary 
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may 
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in 
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for 
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in 
such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere 
in this preamble.

G. Taking of Private Property

    This rule will not cause a taking of private property or otherwise 
have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental 
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property 
Rights.

H. Civil Justice Reform

    This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) 
of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation, 
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

I. Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection 
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule 
is not an economically significant rule and does not create an 
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may 
disproportionately affect children.

J. Indian Tribal Governments

    This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, 
because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more 
Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and 
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities 
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

K. Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions 
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant 
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant 
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to 
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use 
of

[[Page 54785]]

energy. The Administrator of OMB's Office of Information and Regulatory 
Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy action. 
Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects under 
Executive Order 13211.

L. Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards 
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress, 
through OMB, with an explanation of why using these standards would be 
inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary 
consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., specifications of 
materials, performance, design, or operation; test methods; sampling 
procedures; and related management systems practices) that are 
developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies.
    This rule uses the following voluntary consensus standards: 
International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code (IMDG) 2010 Edition, 
Amendment 35-10, Section: 4.2.0.1. The sections that reference these 
standards and the locations where these standards are available are 
listed in 46 CFR 98.30-2.

M. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security 
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which 
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental 
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA)(42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded 
that this action is one of a category of actions that do not 
individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human 
environment. This rule is categorically excluded under section 2.B.2, 
figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(d) and (e) of the Instruction and 6(a) of 
the Federal Register, 67 FR 48243, July 23, 2002. This rule involves 
regulations concerning inspection and equipping of vessels, regulations 
concerning equipment approval and carriage requirements and regulations 
concerning vessel operation safety standards. An environmental analysis 
checklist and a categorical exclusion determination are available in 
the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 46 CFR Part 98

    Cargo vessels, Hazardous materials transportation, Incorporation by 
reference, Marine safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, 
Water pollution control.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 
46 CFR part 98 as follows:

PART 98--SPECIAL CONSTRUCTION, ARRANGEMENT, AND OTHER PROVISIONS 
FOR CERTAIN DANGEROUS CARGOES IN BULK

0
1. The authority citation for part 98 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1903; 46 U.S.C. 3306, 3307, 3703; 49 
U.S.C. App. 1804; E.O. 12234, 45 FR 58801, 3 CFR, 1980 Comp., p. 
277; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

Subpart 98.30--Portable Tanks and Intermediate Bulk Containers

0
2. Revise the heading for subpart 98.30 to read as shown above.

0
3. Amend Sec.  98.30-1 as follows:

0
a. In paragraph (a), after the words ``portable tanks'', add the words 
``and Intermediate Bulk Containers (IBCs)'';
0
b. In paragraph (b) introductory text, after the words ``portable 
tanks'', add the words ``and IBCs'';
0
c. In paragraph (b)(1), remove the symbol ``;'' and add, in its place, 
the symbol ``.'';
0
d. Revise paragraphs (b)(2) and (b)(3); and
0
e. Add paragraph (b)(4).
    The revisions and addition read as follows:


Sec.  98.30-1  Applicability.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (2) An IM 101, IM 102, IMO Type 1, IMO Type 2, or UN portable tank.
    (3) A portable tank authorized for hazardous materials by the 
Associate Administrator for Hazardous Materials Safety (AAHMS) of the 
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), under a 
special permit or Competent Authority Approval issued in accordance 
with 49 CFR part 107, subpart H.
    (4) An IBC, but restricted to those metal IBCs as described in 
Sec.  98.30-6 of this subpart.


Sec.  98.30-17  [Redesignated]

0
4. Redesignate Sec.  98.30-17 as Sec.  98.30-18. Sec. Sec.  98.30-13 
through 98.30-15 [Redesignated as Sec. Sec.  98.30-15 through 98.30-17]

0
5. Redesignate Sec. Sec.  98.30-13 through 98.30-15 as Sec. Sec.  
98.30-15 through 98.30-17, respectively. Sec. Sec.  98.30-6 through 
98.30-11 [Redesignated as Sec. Sec.  98.30-9 through 98.30-14]

0
6. Redesignate Sec. Sec.  98.30-6 through 98.30-11 as Sec. Sec.  98.30-
9 through 98.30-14, respectively.


Sec.  98.30-5  [Redesignated]

0
7. Redesignate Sec.  98.30-5 as Sec.  98.30-7. Sec. Sec.  98.30-2 
through 98.30-4 [Redesignated as Sec. Sec.  98.30-3 through 98.30-5]

0
8. Redesignate Sec. Sec.  98.30-2 through 98.30-4 as Sec. Sec.  98.30-3 
through 98.30-5, respectively.

0
9. Add new Sec.  98.30-2 to read as follows:


Sec.  98.30-2  Incorporation by Reference.

    (a) Certain material is incorporated by reference into this subpart 
with the approval of the Director of the Federal Register under 5 
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. To enforce any edition other than that 
specified in this section, the Coast Guard must publish notice of 
change in the Federal Register and the material must be available to 
the public. All approved material is available for inspection at the 
U.S. Coast Guard, Office of Design and Engineering Standards (CG-ENG), 
2100 2nd St. SW., Stop 7126, Washington, DC 20593-7126, and is 
available from the sources listed below. It is also available for 
inspection at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). 
For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-
741-6030 or go to http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.
    (b) International Maritime Organization (IMO), 4 Albert Embankment, 
London SE1 7SR, United Kingdom, (Phone (44 020 7735 7611); Web site: 
http://www.imo.org.)
    (1) International Maritime Dangerous Goods (IMDG) Code, 2012 
Edition, Section: 4.2.0.1, IBR approved for Sec.  98.30-3.
    (2) International Maritime Dangerous Goods (IMDG) Code, 2012 
Edition, Section: 6.7.2 through 6.7.2.20.3, IBR approved for Sec.  
98.30-5.

0
10. Revise newly redesignated Sec.  98.30-3 to read as follows:


Sec.  98.30-3  Definitions.

    IBC means an intermediate bulk container as defined in 49 CFR 
171.8.
    IM 101 portable tank and IM 102 portable tank means a portable tank 
constructed and approved by PMSA and manufactured on or before January 
1, 2003, that meets the requirements for continued use under 49 CFR 
173.32.
    IMO Type 1 portable tank means a portable tank constructed in 
accordance with International Maritime Dangerous Goods (IMDG) Code 
(2012 Edition), that

[[Page 54786]]

meets the definition of an IMO Type 1 portable tank under Section 
4.2.0.1 of the IMDG Code (incorporated by reference, see Sec.  98.30-
2), and that meets the provisions for continued use under the IMDG 
Code.
    IMO Type 2 portable tank means a portable tank constructed in 
accordance with the IMDG Code, that meets the definition of an IMO Type 
2 portable tank under Section 4.2.0.1 of the IMDG Code (incorporated by 
reference, see Sec.  98.30-2), and that meets the provisions for 
continued use under the IMDG Code.
    MPT means a marine portable tank that was inspected and stamped by 
the Coast Guard on or before September 30, 1992, and that meets the 
applicable requirements in this part and part 64 of this chapter.
    UN portable tank means a portable tank constructed in accordance 
with 49 CFR 178.274 and 178.275, and approved in accordance with 49 CFR 
173.32 and 178.273.

0
11. Amend newly redesignated Sec.  98.30-5 as follows:
0
a. Revise paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(2) introductory text, and (a)(2)(i);
0
b. In paragraph (a)(2)(ii), remove the word ``exemption'' and add, in 
its place, the words ``special permit'';
0
c. Revise paragraph (b);
0
d. Redesignate paragraph (c) as paragraph (d) and revise newly 
redesignated paragraph (d); and
0
e. Add new paragraph (c).
    The revisions and additions read as follows:


Sec.  98.30-5  Vessels carrying portable tanks other than MPTs.

    (a) * * *
    (1) An IM 101, IM 102, IMO Type 1, IMO Type 2, or UN portable tank 
authorized for its contents in accordance with 49 CFR 172.101, 
Hazardous Materials Table, Columns 7 and 8C.
    (2) A portable tank authorized by PHMSA's AAHMS under a special 
permit or Competent Authority Approval issued in accordance with 49 CFR 
part 107, subpart H.
    (i) According to the terms of the special permit or Competent 
Authority Approval, equivalent to an IM 101, IM 102, IMO Type 1, IMO 
Type 2, or UN portable tank.
* * * * *
    (b) Each IM 101, IM 102, or UN portable tank must be tested and 
inspected in accordance with 49 CFR part 180, subpart G and follow 
specifications in accordance with 49 CFR 178.275(c).
    (c) Each IMO Type 1 or IMO Type 2 portable tank must be tested and 
inspected in accordance with Sections 6.7.2 through 6.7.2.20.3 of the 
IMDG Code (incorporated by reference, see Sec.  98.30-2).
    (d) Each portable tank authorized under a special permit or 
Competent Authority Approval from PHMSA's AAHMS must be inspected, 
tested, maintained, and used in accordance with the terms of that 
special permit or Competent Authority Approval.

0
12. Add new Sec.  98.30-6 to read as follows:


Sec.  98.30-6  Vessels carrying IBCs.

    Intermediate Bulk Containers (IBCs) with a classification of 31A 
may be used on a vessel to which this part applies and must meet at a 
minimum the following constructional requirements:
    (a) The shell thickness must be a minimum 6.36 mm (0.25 inches) in 
reference steel.
    (b) There must be a self-closing relief valve set to open at no 
less than 5 psig.
    (c) Closures used on fill openings, in excess of 20 square inches, 
must be equipped with a device to prevent them from fully opening 
without first relieving internal pressure.
    (d) All venting requirements must be followed in accordance with 49 
CFR 178.345-10, Table 1.

0
13. Amend newly redesignated Sec.  98.30-7 as follows:
0
a. In paragraph (a)(1), remove the words ``or ``ORM-E'''' and add, in 
their place, the words ````hazardous substance'', or ``hazardous 
waste'''';
0
b. Revise paragraph (a)(2)(iii);
0
c. In paragraph (a)(3), after the words ``material listed in'', remove 
the text ``Table 98.30-5(a)'' and add, in its place, the words ``Table 
98.30-7(a)--Certain Hazardous Materials Authorized For Transfer To and 
From Portable Tanks'';
0
d. Redesignate Table 98.30-5(a) as Table 98.30-7(a) and transfer the 
newly redesignated table to the end of the section;
0
e. Revise paragraphs (b), (e), and (f); and
0
f. In paragraph (g), remove the words ``on board'' and add, in their 
place, the word ``onboard''.
    The revisions and additions read as follows:


Sec.  98.30-7  Materials authorized for transfer to and from a portable 
tank.

    (a) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (iii) Is authorized for transport in an IM 101, IM 102, IMO Type 1, 
IMO Type 2, or UN portable tank under subpart F of 49 CFR part 173;
* * * * *
    (b) Grade D and Grade E combustible liquids with a flashpoint of 
100[emsp14] [deg]F (38 [deg]C) or higher by closed cup test that are 
not listed by name in the Hazardous Materials Table of 49 CFR 172.101 
may be transferred to and from an MPT, IM 101, IM 102, IMO Type 1, IMO 
Type 2, or UN portable tank conforming to the T Code ``T1'' specified 
in 49 CFR 172.102(c)(7)(i).
* * * * *
    (e) Environmentally hazardous substances (see paragraph (a)(4) of 
this section) may be transferred only to and from an MPT, IM 101, IM 
102, IMO Type 1, IMO Type 2, or UN portable tank.
    (f) A portable tank authorized for transfer of hazardous material 
in this section may be substituted by another portable tank in 
accordance with 49 CFR 173.32(b).
* * * * *

Table 98.30-7(a)--Certain Hazardous Materials Authorized for Transfer To
                         and From Portable Tanks
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acetone.
Alcohols; flash point of 80 [deg]F (27 [deg]C) or less by open-cup test.
Benzene.
Gasoline.
Liquid Nitrogen.
Mixtures of Hydrochloric acid and hydrofluoric acid containing not more
 than 36 percent hydrochloric acid or 2 percent hydrofluoric acid.\1\
Methyl Ethyl Ketone.
Mixtures of hydrochloric acid and hydrofluoric acid containing not more
 than 24 percent hydrochloric acid or 6 percent hydrofluoric acid.\1\
Toluene (Toluol).
Corrosive liquid, toxic, N.O.S. (Mixtures of hydrochloric acid,
 hydrofluoric acid, and fluoboric acid), UN 2922, packing group II,
 containing not more than 11 percent hydrofluoric acid.\1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: \1\ Each MPT must be lined with rubber or with material equally
  acid-resistant and equally strong and durable.


0
14. Add new Sec.  98.30-8 to read as follows:


Sec.  98.30-8  Materials authorized for transfer to and from an IBC.

    Any hazardous material listed in Table 98.30-7(a) of Sec.  98.30-7 
may be transferred to and from an IBC under this subpart, with the 
exception of Liquid Nitrogen.

0
15. Revise newly redesignated Sec.  98.30-9 to read as follows:


Sec.  98.30-9  Lifting a portable tank or IBC.

    (a) No person may lift a portable tank and/or IBC with another 
portable tank and/or IBC.

[[Page 54787]]

    (b) All lifting requirements for IBCs must be followed in 
accordance with 49 CFR 178.704(c) and (f).


Sec.  98.30-10  [Amended]

0
16. In newly redesignated Sec.  98.30-10, after the words ``portable 
tank'', add the words ``or IBC''.

0
17. In newly redesignated Sec.  98.30-11, remove the words ``on board'' 
and add, in their place, the word ``onboard''.
0
18. Amend newly redesignated Sec.  98.30-12 as follows:
0
a. Revise the section heading;
0
b. In paragraph (a), after the words ``portable tank'', add the words 
``and/or IBC'';
0
c. In paragraph (b) introductory text, after the words ``portable 
tank'', add the words ``and/or IBC''; and
0
d. Add new paragraph (c).
    The revision and addition read as follows:


Sec.  98.30-12  Stowage of portable tanks and IBCs.

* * * * *
    (c) All IBCs must be secured as specified in 49 CFR 176.74.

0
19. Amend newly redesignated Sec.  98.30-13 as follows:
0
a. Redesignate the introductory text, paragraph (a), and paragraph (b) 
as paragraphs (a) introductory text, (a)(1), and (a)(2), respectively;
0
b. In redesignated paragraph (a) introductory text, after the words 
``portable tank'', add the words ``or IBC'' and remove the words ``on 
board'' and add, in their place, the word ``onboard'';
0
c. Revise redesignated paragraph (a)(1); and
0
d. Add new paragraphs (a)(3) and (b).
    The revision and additions read as follows:


Sec.  98.30-13  Pipe connections, and filling and discharge openings.

    (a) * * *
    (1) For an IM 101, IM 102, IMO Type 1, IMO Type 2, or UN portable 
tank, the closures specified in 49 CFR 178.275.
* * * * *
    (3) For an IBC, the closures specified in 49 CFR 178.705.
    (b) A manifold cannot be used when transferring a hazardous 
material to or from a portable tank or IBC onboard a vessel, unless the 
portable tank or IBC is equipped with a remote or automatic shutoff 
valve or other automatic means of closure that will activate during an 
emergency.


Sec.  98.30-15  [Amended]

0
20. In newly redesignated Sec.  98.30-15(a), after the words ``portable 
tank'', add the words ``or IBC''.

0
21. Amend newly redesignated Sec.  98.30-16 as follows:
0
a. Revise the section heading;
0
b. Remove the text ``(CG-OES)'' wherever it appears and add, in its 
place, the text ``(CG-ENG)'';
0
c. In paragraph (a) introductory text, remove the word ``shall'' and 
add, in its place, the word ``must''; and
0
d. Add new paragraph (c).
    The revision and addition read as follows:


Sec.  98.30-16  Requirements for ships carrying NLSs in portable tanks 
and IBCs.

* * * * *
    (c) Any ship that carries NLSs in an IBC, as described in Sec.  
98.30-6, must meet all requirements in accordance with 46 CFR 125.120.

0
22. Amend newly redesignated Sec.  98.30-18 as follows:
0
a. In paragraph (a) remove the word ``shall'' and add, in its place, 
the word ``must'', and after the words ``portable tank'', add the words 
``or IBC'';
0
b. In paragraph (b) introductory text, after the words ``portable 
tank'', add the words ``or IBC'', and remove the word ``shall'', and 
add, in its place, the word ``must''; and
0
c. Revise paragraph (b)(1) to read as follows:


Sec.  98.30-18  Qualifications of person in charge.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) On a tank barge, hold a ``Tankerman-PIC'', restricted 
``Tankerman-PIC'', ``Tankerman-PIC (Barge)'', or restricted 
``Tankerman-PIC (Barge)'' endorsement on his or her merchant mariner 
credential or merchant mariner's document authorizing transfer of the 
classification of cargo involved;
* * * * *


Sec.  98.30-19  [Amended]

0
23. In Sec.  98.30-19, in paragraphs (b) and (c), after the words 
``portable tank'', add the words ``or IBC''.


Sec.  98.30-21  [Amended]

0
24. In Sec.  98.30-21, in the introductory text and paragraphs (b) and 
(c), after the words ``portable tank'', add the words ``or IBC''.


Sec.  98.30-23  [Amended]

0
25. In Sec.  98.30-23, in the introductory text, after the words 
``portable tank'', add the words ``or IBC''.


Sec.  98.30-25  [Amended]

0
26. In Sec.  98.30-25, after the words ``portable tank'', add the words 
``or IBC''.


Sec.  98.30-27  [Amended]

0
27. In Sec.  98.30-27, in paragraph (a) introductory text, remove the 
word ``shall'' and add, in its place, the word ``must''.


Sec.  98.30-29  [Amended]

0
28. In Sec.  98.30-29, after the words ``portable tank'', add the words 
``or IBC''.


Sec.  98.30-31  [Amended]

0
29. In Sec.  98.30-31, in the introductory text, after the words 
``portable tank or'', add the words ``IBC or''.


Sec.  98.30-33  [Amended]

0
30. In Sec.  98.30-33, in paragraph (a) introductory text and paragraph 
(b), after the words ``portable tank'', add the words ``or IBC''.


Sec.  98.30-35  [Amended]

0
31. In Sec.  98.30-35, after the words ``portable tank'', add the words 
``or IBC''.


Sec.  98.30-37  [Amended]

0
32. Amend Sec.  98.30-37 as follows:
0
a. In the introductory text, after the words ``portable tank'', add the 
words ``or IBC'';
0
b. In paragraph (b), remove the words ``Coast Guard approved'' and add, 
in their place, the words ``Coast Guard-approved'';
0
c. In paragraph (d), remove the numeral ``2'' and add, in its place, 
the word ``two''; and
0
d. In paragraph (e), remove the numeral ``3'' and add, in its place, 
the word ``three''.

Subpart 98.33-- Portable Tanks and IBCs for Certain Grade E 
Combustible Liquids and Other Regulated Materials

0
33. Revise the heading for subpart 98.33 to read as shown above.

0
34. Amend Sec.  98.33-1 as follows:
0
a. Revise paragraph (b)(1);
0
b. Remove the Note to paragraph (b)(1);
0
c. In paragraph (b)(2), remove the text ``; and'' and add, in its 
place, the symbol ``.''; and
0
d. Add new paragraph (b)(4)
    The revision and addition read as follows:


Sec.  98.33-1  Applicability.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) A DOT-specification 57 portable tank constructed on or before 
October 1, 1996, or a UN portable tank (see 49 CFR 173.32 and Sec.  
98.30-3).
* * * * *

[[Page 54788]]

    (4) An Intermediate Bulk Container (IBC), but restricted to those 
metal IBCs as described in Sec.  98.30-6.


Sec.  98.33-3  [Amended]

0
35. Amend Sec.  98.33-3 as follows:
0
a. In the introductory text, after the words ``portable tanks'', add 
the words ``or IBCs''; and
0
b. In paragraph (c), after the word ``Commandant'', add the text ``(CG-
ENG)''.

0
36. Amend Sec.  98.33-5 as follows:
0
a. Revise the section heading;
0
b. Redesignate the introductory text, paragraph (a), and paragraph (b) 
as paragraphs (a) introductory text, (a)(1), and (a)(2), respectively; 
and
0
c. Add new paragraph (b).
    The revision and addition read as follows:


Sec.  98.33-5  Portable tanks and IBCs authorized.

* * * * *
    (b) The cargoes authorized under Sec.  98.33-3 may be transferred 
to and from IBCs to which this subpart applies if the IBCs meet the 
requirements in Sec.  98.30-6.


Sec.  98.33-7  [Amended]

0
37. In Sec.  98.33-7, after the words ``portable tank'', add the words 
``or IBC''.


Sec.  98.33-9  [Amended]

0
38. In Sec.  98.33-9, after the words ``portable tank'', add the words 
``or IBC''.


Sec.  98.33-11  [Amended]

0
39. In Sec.  98.33-11, in paragraphs (a) and (b), after the word 
``tank'', add the words ``or IBC''.


Sec.  98.33-13  [Amended]

0
40. In Sec.  98.33-13, after the words ``portable tank'', add the words 
``or IBC''.


Sec.  98.33-15  [Amended]

0
41. Amend Sec.  98.33-15 as follows:
0
a. In the introductory text, after the words ``portable tank'', add the 
words ``or IBC'';
0
b. In paragraph (a), remove the text ``Sec.  98.30-11'' and add, in its 
place, the text ``Sec.  98.30-14'';
0
c. In paragraph (b), remove the text ``Sec.  98.30-13'' and add, in its 
place, the text ``Sec.  98.30-15'';
0
d. In paragraph (c), remove the text ``Sec.  98.30-15'' and add, in its 
place, the text ``Sec.  98.30-17'';
0
e. In paragraph (d), remove the text ``Sec.  98.30-17'' and add, in its 
place, the text ``Sec.  98.30-18''; and
0
f. In paragraph (j), remove the text ``Sec.  98.30-14'' and add, in its 
place, the text ``Sec.  98.30-16''.

    Dated: August 27, 2013.
J.G. Lantz,
Director of Commercial Regulations and Standards, U.S. Coast Guard.
[FR Doc. 2013-21627 Filed 9-5-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


