Department of Transportation
Office of the Chief Information Officer
Supporting Statement
Cargo Tank Motor Vehicles in Liquefied Compressed Gas Service
OMB Control No. 2137-0595
Introduction
This is to request the Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB) renewed three-year approved clearance for the information collection entitled, “Cargo Tank Motor Vehicles in Liquefied Compressed Gas Service,” OMB Control No. 2137-0595, which is currently due to expire on October 31, 2010.
Part A. Justification.
Circumstances that make collection of information necessary.
This is a request for renewal without change of a current approval under OMB No. 2137-0595 regarding cargo tank motor vehicles in liquefied compressed gas service. These information collection and recordkeeping requirements pertain to the manufacture, certification, inspection, repair, maintenance, and operation of DOT specification MC 330, MC 331, and certain non-specification cargo tank motor vehicles used to transport liquefied compressed gases. This information collection supports the Departmental Strategic Goal for Safety.
Information collection and recordkeeping requirements contained in this request have been determined to be essential by the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA).
As a result of a serious unloading accident in 1996, PHMSA learned that the emergency discharge control systems installed on cargo tank motor vehicles did not always function as required by the hazardous materials regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180) under all operating conditions. In 1997, PHMSA issued a temporary regulation designed to permit cargo tank motor vehicles with non-complying emergency discharge control systems to continue to operate. This temporary regulation expired on July 1, 1999, and a final rule (Docket No. RSPA-97-2718 (HM-225A) was issued on May 24, 1999 (64 FR 28029) to replace the temporary regulation with a comprehensive safety program that combined measures to prevent unintentional releases of liquefied compressed gases during unloading operations with measures that will assure quick identification of releases and effective mitigation.
The new rule was developed through a negotiated rulemaking. In this negotiated rulemaking, representatives of interests affected by the HMR worked together to analyze safety issues and identify potential solutions. The process gave parties the opportunity to find creative solutions, improve the information data base for decisions, produce more acceptable rules, enhance compliance, and reduce the likelihood of court challenges. The negotiated rulemaking committee included representatives from businesses that transport and deliver propane, anhydrous ammonia, and other liquefied compressed gases; manufacturers and operators of cargo tanks and vehicle components; and state and local public safety and emergency response agencies. The members agreed on the specifics of a proposed regulatory program, and reviewed and concurred on the requirements of the new rule. After evaluation of comments, PHMSA issued a final rule that was based on the written agreement concurred in by the Committee.
The requirements necessitating an information collection under HM-225A included: (1) a requirement that cargo tank operators develop a comprehensive unloading operating procedure and carry it in each cargo tank motor vehicle; (2) new inspection, maintenance, marking, and testing requirements for cargo tank discharge systems, including delivery hose assemblies; and (3) new requirements for state-of-the-art emergency discharge control equipment on certain cargo tank motor vehicles transporting liquefied compressed gases that must be installed and certified by a Registered Inspector (RI). The rule provided a two-year period for development and testing of emergency discharge control technology. After two years, newly manufactured MC 331 cargo tank motor vehicles had to be equipped with emergency discharge control equipment that complies with certain performance standards; MC 330, MC 331 and certain non-specification cargo tank motor vehicles must be retrofitted at their first scheduled pressure test after the two-year period.
The HM-225A final rule was intended to reduce the risk of an unintentional release during unloading, assure prompt identification and control of an unintentional release, and make the requirements easier to understand and comply with. The information collection and recordkeeping burdens because of this rulemaking are imposed on motor carriers and on cargo tank motor vehicle manufacturers and repairers. Authority for the rulemaking and current regulations is the Federal hazardous materials transportation law, 49 U.S.C. §§ 5101-5127.
How, by whom and for what purpose is the information used.
Operating procedures. The HM-225A final rule required that operators of cargo tank motor vehicle in liquefied compressed gas service develop operating procedures applicable to unloading operations and carry them on each cargo tank motor vehicle. The operating procedures must include all information relevant to the vehicle’s emergency discharge control equipment, including the type installed on the vehicle and the parameters within which it is designed to operate. This will help to assure that the person attending cargo tank unloading operations is familiar with, and understands, the features of the cargo tank’s emergency discharge control equipment and how it operates.
Discharge system inspection and maintenance program. The HM-225A final rule required a new inspection, testing, and maintenance program for cargo tank motor vehicles used to transport liquefied compressed gases. For hoses and hose assemblies, the program includes tests of new and repaired hose assemblies; monthly and annual hose assembly inspections, and specific rejection criteria. For piping systems, the program includes monthly tests of a cargo tank’s internal self-closing stop valve, testing of linkages designed to close the internal self-closing stop valve during an emergency, periodic visual inspections of all piping components, and specific rejection criteria. Each operator of a cargo tank motor vehicle used to transport liquefied compressed gases is required to maintain records documenting the inspections and tests, and to mark each hose with a unique identifier. This is intended to facilitate compliance with, and enforcement of, the inspection and maintenance program.
Certification of emergency discharge control equipment. Under the HM-225A final rule, each operator of a cargo tank motor vehicle used to transport a liquefied compressed gas is required to equip the cargo tank motor vehicle with emergency discharge control equipment. The type of equipment required depends on the classification of the material being transported and the nature of the operations being conducted. Equipment must be installed under the supervision of a Registered Inspector and the installation must be certified by the Registered Inspector. In addition, the design of certain types of emergency discharge control equipment must be certified by a Design Certifying Engineer (DCE). This is intended to assure that emergency discharge control equipment is installed correctly and that it will function as required by the HMR. To facilitate compliance with, and enforcement of, the proposed requirement, each operator of a cargo tank motor vehicle subject to these requirements must keep a copy of the emergency discharge control equipment certification.
Extent of automated information collection.
The information collection and recordkeeping requirements for operating procedures are general requirements that allow motor carriers to develop procedures that are best suited for their operations. The inspection, maintenance, and testing requirements for cargo tank discharge system components are additional certifications for current industry practices to ensure cargo tank motor vehicle safety. The Government Paperwork Elimination Act directs agencies to allow the option of electronic filing and recordkeeping by October 2003, when practicable. Records documenting inspection, testing, and maintenance programs may be kept electronically; however, they are not required to be submitted to us, so it is not applicable.
Efforts to identify duplication.
There is no duplication, as the information requested is not required by any other source. Each response is unique and information derived from one may not be inferred to another.
Efforts to minimize the burden on small businesses.
Applicable requirements have been made as general as possible to minimize burdens on affected persons and yet provide for the safe transportation of hazardous materials in cargo tank motor vehicles. PHMSA believes standardized emergency operating procedures can be developed for use by a majority of industry members who belong to various trade associations, thus reducing the burden hours and costs to individual members of compliance with the emergency operations procedure requirements. Installation of new emergency discharge control equipment was not required for two years after the effective date of the final rule, thereby assuring sufficient time for the industry to develop and test new technologies. Retrofits of cargo tank motor vehicles in service at the time of the rule were allowed a five-year schedule to coincide with a cargo tank’s regularly scheduled periodic pressure test, thus assuring that a cargo tank subject to the requirements will be out of service only once during the five-year period and avoiding conflicts with peak periods of use.
Impact of less frequent collection of information.
Due to the hazards involved, it is not possible to lessen the frequency of information collection and recordkeeping. The development of an unloading operating procedure is a one-time process. Maintenance of a copy of the procedure on each cargo tank motor vehicle is a continuing requirement. Requirements for discharge system inspection and maintenance are continuing requirements that ensure that each cargo tank in liquefied compressed gas service is subject to a rigorous and systematic safety program. Certification of emergency discharge control equipment installation is a one-time requirement.
Special circumstances
This collection of information is conducted in a manner consistent with the guidelines in 5 CFR 1320.5 (d)(2).
Compliance with 5 CFR 1320.8.
A notice and request for comments on the renewal of this information collection was published in the Federal Register on August 20, 2010 [75 FR 51520] under Docket No. PHMSA-2010-0178 (Notice No. 10-3). The comment period closed on October 19, 2010. No comments were received for this information collection. A notice and request for comments was published in the Federal Register on October 27, 2010 [75 FR 66185] also under Docket No. PHMSA-2010-0178 (Notice No. 10-8) inviting public comment on the renewal of this information collection. The comment period closes on November 26, 2010.
9. Payments or gifts to respondents.
There is no payment or gift to respondents associated with this collection of information.
10. Assurance of confidentiality.
None of the data collected contain personally identifiable information (PII) or business confidential information. Therefore, no guarantees of confidentiality are provided to applicants.
11. Justification for collection of sensitive information.
Not applicable. Information is not of a sensitive nature.
12. Estimates of burden hours for information requested.
The burden hours and cost to respondents proposed and finalized under this rule are estimated as follows.
Total Annual Respondents: 6,958 (6,800 + 150 + 8)
Total Annual Responses: 920,538 (12,227 + 440,160 + 400,140+ 12,227 + 12.227 + 36,680 + 1,899 + 4,970 +5,770 + 8)
Total Annual Burden Hours: 200,914 (1,018 + 44,016 + 80,028 + 1,018 + 4,279 + 15,283 + 15,192 + 39,760 + 320)
Total Annual Cost Burden: $2,456,064
(Corrected due to mathematical errors in previous IC
packages) ($12,410 + $536,115 + $974,741 + $12,410 + $52,123 + 186,151 $ + 185,038 + $484,276 + $12,800)
Discharge system inspection and maintenance program for cargo tanks transporting liquefied compressed gases.
Marking new/repaired hoses with unique identifier:
Total respondents 6,800 (total number of establishments)
Annual responses 12,227 (total number of new/repaired hose
assemblies)
Annual burden hours 1,018 (hose assemblies x time to create
record (5 min))
Annual burden cost $12,410 (hose assemblies x time to create
record x hourly rate (12.18))
Monthly hose inspections:
Total respondents 6,800 (total number of establishments)
Annual responses 440,160 (total number of hoses (36,680) x 12
months)
Annual burden hours 44,016 (annual responses x time to create
record (5 min for test + 1 min for
record))
Annual burden cost $536,115 (annual responses x time to create
record x hourly rate (12.18))
Record of monthly piping tests:
Total respondents 6,800 (total number of establishments)
Annual responses 400,140 (total number of cargo tanks (33,345)
x 12 months)
Annual burden hours 80,028 (annual responses x time to create
record (11 min for test + 1 min for
record))
Annual burden cost $974,741 (annual responses x time to create
record x hourly rate (12.18))
Hose pressure test marking:
Total respondents 6,800 (total number of establishments)
Annual responses 12,227 (total number of new/repaired hose
assemblies)
Annual burden hours 1,018 (total hose assemblies x time to
create record (5 min))
Annual burden cost $12,410 (total hose assemblies x time to
create record x hourly rate (12.18))
Hose pressure test records:
Total respondents 6,800 (total number of establishments)
Annual responses 12,227 (total number of new/repaired hose
assemblies)
Annual burden hours 4,279 (total hose assemblies x time to
create record (20 min for test + 1
min for record))
Annual burden cost $52,123 (total hose assemblies x time to
create record x hourly rate (12.18))
Annual hose test records:
Total respondents 6,800 (total number of establishments)
Annual responses 36,680 (total number of hoses)
Annual burden hours 2,838 (hoses x time to create record (20
min for test x 5 min for record))
Annual burden cost $186,151 (hoses x time to create record x
hourly rate (12.18))
RI installation certification for passive systems for 5-year retrofit and new construction.
Assumptions -- Time to create record – 8 hours
Hourly rate for RI -- $12.18
Total respondents 150 (total manufacturing/repair facilities
that work on MC 331 cargo tanks)
Annual responses 1,899 (20 percent of total transports + 250
new tanks)
Annual burden hours 15,192 (annual responses x time to create
record)
Annual burden cost $ 185,038 (annual responses x time to create
record x hourly rate)
RI installation certification for off-truck remotes for 5-year retrofit and new construction.
Total respondents 150 (total manufacturing/repair facilities
that work on MC 331 cargo tanks)
Annual responses 4,970 (25,100 bobtails - 4,000
grandfathered bobtails x 20% + 750 new tanks)
Annual burden hours 39,760 (annual responses x time to create
record)
Annual burden cost $484,276 (annual responses x time to create
record x hourly rate)
RI installation certification for replacement and new construction off-truck remotes.
Total respondents 150 (total manufacturing/repair facilities
that work on MC 331 cargo tanks)
Annual responses 5,770 (total number of bobtails ÷ average
useful life of system + 750 new tanks)
Annual burden hours 46,160 (annual responses x time to create record)
Annual burden cost $562,228 (annual responses x time to create record x hourly rate)
Certification of passive system by Design Certifying Engineer.
Assumptions – 8 systems certified per year
Hour cost of DCE – $40.00
Time to certify system – 40 hours
Total respondents 8 (DCEs certifying 8 new systems per
year)
Annual responses 8 (DCEs certifying 8 new systems per
year)
Annual burden hours 320 (8 systems x 40 hours)
Burden cost first year $12,800 (burden hours x 40.000)
13. Estimate of total annual costs to respondents.
There is no cost burden to respondents except those identified in item 12 above.
14. Estimate of costs to the Federal government.
There is no cost to the Federal government.
15. Explanation of program changes or adjustments.
There is no change in burden as a result of this request for renewal.
16. Publication of results of data collection.
There is no publication for statistical use.
17. Approval for not displaying the expiration date of OMB approval.
Approved OMB number is prominently displayed in the text of 49 CFR 171.6.
18. Exceptions to certification statement.
There is no exception to PHMSA’s certification of this request for information collection approval.
Part B. Collections of Information Employing Statistical Methods.
This information collection does not employ statistical methods.
1. Describe potential respondent universe and any sampling selection method to be used.
There is no potential respondent universe or any sampling selection method being used.
2. Describe procedures for collecting information, including statistical methodology for stratification and sample selection, estimation procedures, degree of accuracy needed, and less than annual periodic data cycles.
There are no procedures for collecting information, including statistical methodology for stratification and sample selection, estimation procedures, degree of accuracy needed, and less than annual periodic data cycles.
3. Describe methods to maximize response rate.
There are no methods to maximize the response rate.
4. Describe tests of procedures or methods.
There are no tests of procedures or methods.
5. Provide name and telephone number of individuals who were consulted on statistical aspects of the information collection and who will actually collect and/or analyze the information.
There were no individuals consulted on statistical aspects of this information collection.
| File Type | application/msword |
| Author | Foster, T. Glenn |
| Last Modified By | glenn.foster |
| File Modified | 2010-10-28 |
| File Created | 2010-10-28 |