Prohibition of Oxidizers Aboard Aircraft

SUMMARY: RSPA proposes to amend the Hazardous Material Regulations to

prohibit the carriage of oxidizers, including compressed oxygen, in

passenger carrying aircraft and in Class D compartments on cargo

aircraft. This proposal specifically analyzes the prohibition of

oxidizers in Class D cargo compartments. RSPA plans to issue a

supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking further analyzing the

prohibition on the carriage of oxidizers aboard passenger carrying

aircraft in Class B and C cargo compartments. RSPA is also proposing to

add a shipping description to the Hazardous Materials Table for

chemical oxygen generators and to require approval of a chemical oxygen

generator that is transported with its means of initiation attached.

These requirements would apply to foreign and domestic aircraft

entering, leaving, or operating within the United States. The purpose

of these proposals is to enhance air transportation safety.

DATES: Comments must be received by February 28, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Address comments to the Dockets Unit, Research and Special

Programs Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, room 8421,

400 Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC 20590-0001. Comments should

identify the docket number and be submitted in five copies. Persons

wishing to receive confirmation of receipt of their comments should

include a self-addressed, stamped postcard. The Dockets Unit is located

in the Department of Transportation headquarters building (Nassif

Building) at the above address on the eighth floor. Public dockets may

be reviewed there between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday

through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John A. Gale, Office of Hazardous

Materials Standards, (202) 366-8553, Research and Special Programs

Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street

SW, Washington DC 20590-0001; or Gary Davis, Office of Flight

Standards, (202) 267-8166, Federal Aviation Administration, U.S.

Department of Transportation, 800 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington

DC 20591.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) is investigating

the May 11, 1996, crash of a passenger-carrying aircraft which resulted

in 110 fatalities. Preliminary evidence indicates that chemical oxygen

generators were carried as cargo on board the aircraft and may have

caused or contributed to the severity of the accident. On May 24, 1996,

RSPA published an interim final rule (IFR) in the Federal Register (61

FR 26418) under Docket HM-224 which temporarily prohibits the offering

for transportation and transportation of chemical oxygen generators as

cargo aboard in passenger carrying aircraft. The period for submitting

comments on the interim final rule in Docket HM-224 closed July 23,

1996. After completing evaluation of the comments received, and the

risks posed by oxygen generators, RSPA will issue a final rule under

Docket HM-224 to make the prohibition permanent, terminate or modify

the prohibition, or otherwise amend provisions of the Hazardous

Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171 through 180) that apply to

oxygen generators. The proposal in this NPRM for amendments to 49 CFR

171.11 and 172.101 are based on the existing (temporary) prohibition

against transporting chemical oxygen generators as cargo aboard

passenger carrying aircraft. These proposals may be modified in a final

rule, as appropriate, to consider the further final rule to be issued

under Docket HM-224.

On May 31, 1996, NTSB issued two recommendations to RSPA, as

follows:

In cooperation with the Federal Aviation Administration,

permanently prohibit the transportation of chemical oxygen generators

as cargo on board any passenger or cargo aircraft when the generators

have passed their expiration dates, and the chemical core has not been

depleted. (Class I, Urgent Action) (A-96-29)

In cooperation with the Federal Aviation Administration, prohibit

the transportation of oxidizers and oxidizing materials (e.g., nitric

acid) in cargo compartments that do not have fire or smoke detection

systems. (Class I, Urgent Action) (A-96-30)

The actions proposed in this notice are responsive, in part, to the

NTSB recommendations and are based on RSPA's preliminary assessment of

the hazards posed by oxidizers. In its recommendations to RSPA, the

NTSB cited three previous incidents in which oxidizers caused fires

aboard aircraft. In each of these incidents, there were apparent or

known serious violations of the HMR. RSPA and FAA are not aware of any

fire aboard an aircraft having been caused directly by transport of

oxidizers in conformance with the HMR. However, RSPA and FAA agree with

the NTSB that, in certain circumstances, oxidizers can contribute to

the severity of a fire and may pose an unreasonable risk when

transported in inaccessible cargo compartments which are not required

to be equipped with fire or smoke detection systems or fire suppression

(i.e., fire-extinguishing) systems.

II. Cargo Compartments Aboard Aircraft

Various design features incorporated into a cargo compartment's

design are intended to control or extinguish any fire which might occur

in that compartment. Under the Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR),

cargo compartments are classified into five categories, Classes A, B,

C, D, and E (see 14 CFR 25.857). In brief, a Class A compartment is one

which is easily accessible in flight and in which the presence of a

fire would be easily discovered by a crewmember. A Class B compartment

is one in which any part of the compartment is accessible in flight to

a crewmember with a hand held fire extinguisher and has an approved

smoke detector or fire detector system. A Class C compartment is not

accessible but has an approved smoke detector or fire detector system,

an approved built-in fire-extinguishing system, means to control

ventilation so that the extinguishing agent can control any fire that

may start within the compartment, and means to exclude hazardous

quantities of smoke, flames or extinguishing agent from any compartment

occupied by crew or passengers.

A Class D compartment is not accessible but is one in which a fire

occurring in it will be completely confined without endangering the

safety of the airplane or the occupants, ventilation is controlled so

that any fire likely to occur will not progress beyond safe limits,

compartment volume does not exceed 1,000 cubic feet, and there are

means to exclude hazardous quantities of smoke, flames or noxious gases

from any compartment occupied

[[Page 68956]]

by crew or passengers. A Class D compartment is not required to have a

fire or smoke detection system or a fire suppression system. Its design

is intended to confine and control the severity of a fire. It generally

is not sealed sufficiently to extinguish a fire, but is designed to

limit air flow enough to prevent a significant fire. For a compartment

of 500 cubic feet (cu. ft.) or less, an air flow of 1500 cu. ft. per

hour (three air exchanges per hour) is acceptable.

A Class E compartment is one used on cargo-only aircraft which has

an approved smoke or fire detection system, means to shut off the

ventilating airflow and means to exclude hazardous quantities of smoke,

flames or noxious gases from the flight crew compartment.

III. Oxidizers Under the HMR

Under the HMR, an oxidizer (Division 5.1) is a material that may,

generally by yielding oxygen, cause or enhance the combustion of other

materials (see 49 CFR 173.127). Materials in Division 5.1 are

subdivided into Packing Groups I, II, or III, a relative ranking

corresponding to high, moderate or low risks posed by the material.

Packing groups are assigned to specifically named materials in the

Sec. 172.101 Hazardous Materials Table (Table). For generic entries,

such as ``Oxidizing solid, n.o.s.'' (``n.o.s.'' means ``not otherwise

specified''), packing groups are assigned by analogy with existing

entries in the Table for liquids, and by test results for solids.

Certain gases (Class 2), most notably oxygen, are also oxidizers under

the HMR and, even though they are not classed as such, they are

required to be identified with the OXIDIZER or OXYGEN label.

IV. Oxidizers Aboard Aircraft

Liquid oxidizers in Packing Group I are very reactive and have the

ability to initiate and substantially intensify fires. These materials

are forbidden for transportation by passenger-carrying aircraft and are

permitted only in restricted quantities aboard cargo-only aircraft.

Most oxidizers will not initiate fires when spilled or released, but

will intensify fires from other sources. Many of these materials are

permitted for transport aboard passenger-carrying and cargo-only

aircraft. When transported by aircraft, these materials are subject to

per package quantity limits specified in the Table, and to aircraft

quantity limits specified in Sec. 175.75.

Oxidizers currently authorized for transportation by aircraft in

Class D cargo compartments generally will not initiate a fire. The

potential hazard posed by them is that, if a fire were to occur

elsewhere in the compartment, in the absence of a fire suppression

system, the fire may burn long enough to involve the oxidizer. The

oxidizer would then provide an oxygen-enriched environment which could

intensify the fire and override the limited safety features of the

compartment.

In the absence of a fire caused by another source, oxidizers

currently authorized for air transportation and offered in conformance

with the HMR present very little risk to aircraft, crew or passengers.

The threat of a serious risk arises from the mixing of oxidizers with

baggage and other cargo which are potential sources of fire. Over the

past twenty years, virtually all fires aboard aircraft in passenger

baggage or cargo involved forbidden materials or serious violations of

the HMR.

V. Prohibition of Oxidizers Aboard Aircraft in Class D Cargo

Compartments

Knowledge of the May 11, 1996, crash has increased awareness of the

hazards posed by hazardous materials in transportation, and increased

the vigilance on the part of the public, airlines, commercial shippers

and the Federal Government. While this should result in fewer instances

involving transportation of forbidden materials aboard aircraft, fires

initiated by forbidden materials in passenger baggage and cargo likely

will not be totally eliminated. Further, because Class D cargo

compartments are not required to be equipped with smoke or fire

detection systems or fire-extinguishing systems, oxidizers could become

involved in and substantially intensify a cargo compartment fire

thereby contributing to the severity of an incident and, possibly, the

loss of life and property. For these reasons, RSPA and FAA agree with

the NTSB recommendation to prohibit the transportation of oxidizers in

cargo compartments that do not have fire or smoke detection systems.

Therefore, RSPA proposes to amend Sec. 175.85 to prohibit the loading

or transportation in a Class D cargo compartment of a package for which

an OXIDIZER or OXYGEN label (see Secs. 172.426 and 172.405) is required

under Subpart E of Part 172. These restrictions would apply to both

foreign and domestic aircraft entering, leaving or operating in the

United States.

The proposed prohibition against transportation of oxidizers as

cargo in Class D compartments (and the possible expansion of this

proposed prohibition to Class B and C compartments, as discussed in

Part VI, below) would not affect the exception in 49 CFR 175.10(a)(7)

for operator-supplied oxygen for a passenger's use during flight.

However, in this NPRM, RSPA is proposing an editorial change to this

section to clarify that this exception applies only to oxygen provided

for use by an onboard passenger and does not allow the air carrier to

transport medical oxygen devices as cargo in order to move them to the

locations where they will be needed, at a later time, for use by

passengers.

At the present time, a passenger's own medical oxygen cylinder may

be transported as cargo on passenger-carrying aircraft in compliance

with the HMR, but the passenger's own cylinder may not be transported

in the passenger cabin. 49 CFR 175.85(a). If RSPA ultimately prohibits

the carriage of all oxidizers, including gaseous oxygen, in Class B, C,

and D compartments on passenger-carrying aircraft, a passenger would

not be able to ship its own medical oxygen on the same airplane. The

passenger would have to arrange for another supply of oxygen at

destination, rather than using a cylinder that the passenger owns.

FAA supports a complete removal of oxidizers from passenger-

carrying aircraft, as proposed, but also believes that, if it is

necessary to allow a passenger to transport its own oxygen cylinder for

use at destination, it is far safer to stow the cylinder in the

passenger cabin, under the control of and accessible to the airline

crew, than in an inaccessible cargo compartment. FAA does not believe

that it is prudent to allow for the carriage of compressed oxygen in an

inaccessible Class D compartment. It believes that, if an oxygen

cylinder is involved in a fire, the release of oxygen will intensify

the fire. Because the Class D cargo compartment does not contain

detection or suppression devices and because it is inaccessible to

crew, a fire that might otherwise be survivable has an increased risk

of becoming fatal. Thus, FAA believes that it would be safer to carry

personal medical oxygen cylinders in the cabin because the crew could

quickly remove the cylinders from any fire area in the cabin. This is

in contrast to the complete inability of the crew to remove compressed

oxygen from an inaccessible Class D cargo compartment.

RSPA expressly invites comments on this and any other alternatives

(to completely prohibiting passenger-owned oxygen cylinders) that would

accommodate passengers with breathing difficulties that need their own

supply of oxygen at destination. These comments should indicate

whether, and how many, passengers actually ship their own medical

oxygen cylinders on

[[Page 68957]]

the same airplane in order to have a supply of oxygen at their

destination.

RSPA also invites air carriers to submit comments on the effect of

the prohibition on current practices of using passenger-carrying

aircraft to ``stage'' or position the oxygen cylinders that airlines

provide to passengers with breathing difficulties for use during flight

under 49 CFR 175.10(a)(7). The proposed prohibition would have the

effect of requiring air carriers to ship their own cylinders by ground

transportation or by cargo-only aircraft, rather than using their own

passenger-carrying aircraft to move these devices to locations for

passenger use.

FAA is working on a related action to require that Class D

compartments be clearly marked so that cargo-handling personnel will be

able to recognize them.

RSPA and FAA have tentatively determined that the costs of the

requirements of this proposal would be $25 million over ten years ($17

million, present value). RSPA and FAA have also tentatively determined

that the benefits of this proposal will outweigh the costs if it saves

nine or more lives over the next ten years.

VI. Prohibition of Oxidizers As Cargo on All Passenger Carrying

Aircraft

RSPA is proposing to extend the prohibition on oxidizers to Class B

and C aircraft cargo compartments, effectively prohibiting the carriage

of oxidizers on passenger carrying aircraft. RSPA plans on issuing an

SNPRM further developing and analyzing this part of our proposed rule

in the very near future. Although the proposal has not been fully

developed, it is being proposed in this document for two reasons: (1)

we would like to take advantage of the intervening time to seek public

comment that can be used in development of the SNPRM; to the extent

that commenters can very quickly provide us with their comments and

supporting data, we will consider them in developing the SNPRM; and (2)

we believe that, in preparing comments on the prohibition in ``D''

compartments, commenters should consider the possibility that any final

rule could include a prohibition on all passenger carrying aircraft.

VII. Oxygen Generators: Shipping Description and Small Personal

Oxygen Generators

A. Shipping Description

Currently, under the HMR, the most appropriate shipping description

for an oxygen generator (chemical) containing sodium chlorate as the

primary constituent is ``Oxidizing solid, n.o.s., 5.1, UN1479, II.''

RSPA does not believe that this name adequately describes an oxygen

generator. In particular, the name does not communicate to an air

carrier the fact that the material is not authorized on passenger

carrying aircraft. Therefore, consistent with changes recently adopted

into the International Civil Aviation Organizations Technical

Instructions for the Transport of Dangerous Goods By Air, RSPA proposes

to add the following description to the Hazardous Materials Table

(Table) ``Oxygen generator, chemical, 5.1 UN3353, II.'' RSPA also is

proposing to revise Secs. 171.11, 171.12, and 171.12a to require the

use of the new name in international transportation.

The second sentence of proposed Sec. 171.11(d)(14) and the word

``Forbidden'' in Column 9A of the proposed Table entry for ``Oxygen

generator, chemical'' are based on the existing (temporary) prohibition

against transporting chemical oxygen generators aboard passenger-

carrying aircraft. These proposals may be modified in a final rule, as

appropriate, to consider the further final rule to be published under

Docket HM-224. The UN identification number assigned to the proposed

shipping name ``Oxygen generator, chemical'' in the Table may be

revised if the UN Committee of Experts on the Transport Of Dangerous

Goods adopts a different identification number in its Recommendations

on the Transport of Dangerous Goods.

In addition, RSPA believes that the hazards posed by an oxygen

generator, chemical that is shipped with its means of initiation

attached require special approval. Therefore, consistent with the

prohibitions and conditions specified in Sec. 173.21, RSPA is proposing

a separate requirement that oxygen generator, chemical that is shipped

with its means of initiation attached must: (1) be classed and approved

by the Associate Administrator for Hazardous Materials Safety; (2)

incorporate at least two safety features that will prevent

unintentional activation of the generator; and (3) when transported by

air, be contained in a packaging prepared and originally offered for

transportation by the approval holder. RSPA is also proposing to

require that each shipper of an approved oxygen generator have a copy

of the approval and that the approval number be marked on the outside

of the package.

B. Small Personal Oxygen Genenerators

In the interim final rule RSPA published under Docket HM-224, RSPA

prohibited the transportation of oxygen generators by passenger

carrying aircraft. An exception was provided for personal oxygen

generators that meet the conditions of Sec. 175.10(a)(24). Section

175.10(a)(24) requires that the person carrying the oxygen generator

receive the approval of the operator of the aircraft and that the

personal oxygen generators conform to the following: (1) a six foot

drop test without loss of contents or activation; (2) be equipped with

at least two positive means of preventing unintentional activation; (3)

be well insulated, and when actuated the temperature on any external

surface does not exceed 212 degrees Fahrenheit; (4) be in the

manufacturer's original packaging which must include a sealed outer

wrapping or clear evidence that the generator has not been tampered

with; and (5) be marked to indicate conformance with

Sec. 175.10(a)(24).

In its comments to the interim final rule, the Air Line Pilots

Association (ALPA) requested that the exception for small personal

oxygen generators in Sec. 175.10(a)(24) be removed. Though

Sec. 175.10(a)(24) requires passengers to notify operators when there

are oxygen generators in their baggage, ALPA stated that an aircraft

operator has no way of knowing that these small chemical oxygen

generators are being carried in a passenger's checked baggage because

there are no public awareness programs or procedures for notifying

passengers that passengers are to contact operators before they offer

bags containing generators as checked baggage. ALPA also stated that

there is no realistic way to know when or that the person who purchased

or who intends to carry oxygen generators has been educated in the

proper way to inspect and maintain them as specified in the HMR. ALPA

went on to say that there is no way for an operator to examine the

units to verify that a passenger is in compliance with these

requirements. ALPA also pointed out that the Civil Aviation Authority

of the United Kingdom has banned personal oxygen generators on

passenger-carrying aircraft.

RSPA believes that adequate public notice and comment should be

provided before the exception in Sec. 175.10(a)(24) is removed.

Therefore, RSPA is proposing, in this NPRM, to remove the exception

provided in Sec. 175.10(a)(24) for small personal oxygen generators.

VIII. Request for Additional Comments

RSPA requests any available information concerning the costs and

benefits of this proposed action. RSPA is requesting information

concerning the hazards posed by oxidizers in aircraft cargo

compartments that have fire detection or suppression systems. Please

[[Page 68958]]

provide detailed cost information to RSPA as to the manner by which you

would incur costs as the result of the proposed ban of oxidizers

including all germane monetary and qualitative cost information. RSPA

also solicits comments from those foreign operators who would incur

costs as the result of this proposal. Although our evaluation has not

been able to determine any apparent cost impact on cargo aircraft

carriers, RSPA recognizes there could, nonetheless, be a potential cost

impact. As the result of this concern, RSPA solicits information from

cargo aircraft operators who find they would incur costs from

implementation of the proposed rule. Potentially impacted shippers are

asked to provide detailed information on the manner by which they would

incur costs.

There may also be adverse impacts on airlines if they routinely use

passenger-carrying aircraft to transport, as cargo, oxygen cylinders

which are normally installed on aircraft and must be periodically

retested or refilled. RSPA has not assessed the costs associated with

prohibiting the shipment of oxygen cylinders on passenger carrying

aircraft. Therefore, RSPA requests any available information concerning

the costs and benefits of banning oxygen cylinders, as cargo, aboard

passenger carrying aircraft. Please provide detailed information as to

the manner by which you would incur costs. In particular, RSPA is

requesting information on the number of cylinders of oxygen which are

transported each day on passenger carrying aircraft. What is the

typical size of these containers? What other means of transportation

are available? What are the cost differences to the airlines for using

these other means of transportation?

By limiting the prohibition on oxidizers to packages required to be

labeled OXIDIZER and OXYGEN, the prohibition would not apply to

oxidizers classed as consumer commodities, ORM-D, under the provisions

of Sec. 173.152, or as consumer commodities, Class 9, as permitted

under Sec. 171.11. RSPA requests comments regarding whether it would be

appropriate to extend this prohibition to consumer commodities which

are oxidizers or whether quantity limits should be imposed on these

materials in Sec. 175.75.

IX. Future Rulemaking

RSPA, in coordination with FAA, has initiated a study to assess the

risks associated with the transportation of hazardous materials in

aircraft cargo compartments. As an initial step, RSPA held a meeting in

Cambridge, Massachusetts on October 22, 1996, for purposes of

identifying accident scenarios, probabilities of occurrence, and

expected consequences. In attendance were representatives from the

NTSB, FAA, Air Transport Association, Chemical Manufacturers

Association, Air Line Pilots Association, International Air Line

Passenger Association and several aircraft manufacturers. Based on the

outcome of this study, RSPA may initiate a rulemaking to ban additional

hazardous materials. RSPA requests comments regarding whether it would

be appropriate to extend this prohibition to other materials which may

pose hazards similar to oxidizers, such as organic peroxides. Comments

are requested as to the costs and benefits of these possible actions.

X. Regulatory Analyses and Notices

Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures

This proposed rule is considered a significant regulatory action

under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 and was reviewed by the

Office of Management and Budget. The rule is considered significant

under the regulatory policies and procedures of the Department of

Transportation (44 FR 11034). A preliminary regulatory evaluation is

available for review in the public docket.

Executive Order 12612

This proposed rule has been analyzed in accordance with the

principles and criteria contained in Executive Order 12612

(``Federalism''). The Federal hazardous materials transportation law

(49 U.S.C. 5101-5127) contains an express preemption provision that

preempts State, local, and Indian tribe requirements on certain covered

subjects. Covered subjects are:

(i) the designation, description, and classification of hazardous

material;

(ii) the packing, repacking, handling, labeling, marking, and

placarding of hazardous material;

(iii) the preparation, execution, and use of shipping documents

pertaining to hazardous material and requirements respecting the

number, content, and placement of such documents;

(iv) the written notification, recording, and reporting of the

unintentional release in transportation of hazardous material; or

(v) the design, manufacturing, fabrication, marking, maintenance,

reconditioning, repairing, or testing of a package or container which

is represented, marked, certified, or sold as qualified for use in the

transportation of hazardous material.

Because RSPA lacks discretion in this area, preparation of a

federalism assessment is not warranted. Title 49 U.S.C. 5125(b)(2)

provides that DOT must determine and publish in the Federal Register

the effective date of Federal preemption. That effective date may not

be earlier than the 90th day following the date of issuance of the

final rule and not later than two years after the date of issuance.

This proposed rule would require oxidizers to be transported in certain

types of cargo compartments aboard aircraft. RSPA solicits comments on

whether the proposed rule would have any effect on State, local or

Indian tribe requirements and, if so, the most appropriate effective

date of Federal preemption.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

I certify that this proposed rule will not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This

proposed rule applies to air carriers, most of whom are not small

entities.

Paperwork Reduction Act

This proposed rule does not propose any new information collection

requirements.

Regulation Identifier Number (RIN)

A regulation identifier number (RIN) is assigned to each regulatory

action listed in the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulations. The

Regulatory Information Service Center publishes the Unified Agenda in

April and October of each year. The RIN number contained in the heading

of this document can be used to cross-reference this action with the

Unified Agenda.

List of Subjects

49 CFR Part 171

Exports, Hazardous materials transportation, Hazardous waste,

Imports, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

49 CFR Part 172

Hazardous materials transportation, Hazardous waste, Labeling,

Marking, Packaging and containers, Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

49 CFR Part 173

Hazardous materials transportation, Packaging and containers,

Radioactive materials, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,

Uranium.

49 CFR Part 175

Air carriers, Hazardous materials transportation, Radioactive

materials, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

[[Page 68959]]

In consideration of the foregoing, 49 CFR Parts 171, 172, 173 and

175 would be amended as follows:

PART 171--GENERAL INFORMATION, REGULATIONS, AND DEFINITIONS

1. The authority citation for part 171 continues to read as

follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101-5127; 49 CFR 1.53.

2. In Sec. 171.11, paragraph (d)(14) is added to read as follows:

Sec. 171.11 Use of ICAO Technical Instructions.

* * * * *

(d) * * *

(14) An oxygen generator (chemical) must be classed, approved, and

described in accordance with the requirements of this subchapter.

Except as provided in Sec. 175.10(a)(7) of this subchapter, oxygen

generators (chemical) may not be transported on passenger carrying

aircraft (see Sec. 173.21 of this subchapter).

3. In Sec. 171.12, paragraph (b)(17) is added to read as follows:

Sec. 171.12 Import and export shipments.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(17) An oxygen generator (chemical) must be classed, approved, and

described in accordance with the requirements of this subchapter.

* * * * *

4. In Sec. 171.12a, paragraph (b)(16) is added to read as follows:

Sec. 171.12a Canadian shipments and packagings.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(16) An oxygen generator (chemical) must be classed, approved, and

described in accordance with the requirements of this subchapter.

PART 172--HAZARDOUS MATERIALS TABLE, SPECIAL PROVISIONS, HAZARDOUS

MATERIALS COMMUNICATIONS, EMERGENCY RESPONSE INFORMATION, AND

TRAINING REQUIREMENTS

5. The authority citation for part 172 continues to read as

follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101-5127; 49 CFR 1.53.

6. In the Sec. 172.101 Hazardous Materials Table, the following

entry is added in appropriate alphabetical order:

Sec. 172.101 Purpose and use of hazardous materials table.

* * * * *

[[Page 68960]]

Section 172.101.--Hazardous Materials Table

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

Hazardous (8) Packaging authorizations (Sec. 173.***) (9) Quantity limitations (10) Vessel stowage

materials Hazard ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- requirements

Symbols (1) descriptions and class or Identification PG (5) Label Codes Special Passenger -------------------------------

proper shipping division numbers (4) (6) provisions (7) Exceptions (8A) Nonbulk (8B) Bulk (8C) aircraft/ rail Cargo aircraft Location (10A) Other

names (2) (3) (9A) only (9B) (10A) (10B)

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

* * * * * * *

.............. Oxygen generator, l5.1 UN3353........... I.............. 5.1............ 57............. None........... 211............ None.......... Forbidden..... 15 kg......... D............. 56, 58, 69,

chemical. 106

.............. .................. .......... ................. II............. 5.1............ 57............. None........... 212............ None.......... Forbidden..... 25 kg......... D............. 56, 58, 69,

106

* * * * * * *

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

[[Page 68961]]

7. In 172.102, in paragraph (c)(1), Special Provision 57 is added

to read as follows:

Sec. 172.102 Special provisions.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(1) * * *

57 An oxygen generator, chemical that is shipped with its means

of initiation attached must: (1) be classed and approved by the

Associate Administrator for Hazardous Materials Safety; (2)

incorporate at least two safety features that will prevent

unintentional activation of the generator; and (3) when transported

by cargo-only aircraft, be contained in a packaging prepared and

originally offered for transportation by the approval holder. Each

offerer of an approved oxygen generator must have a copy of the

approval, and the approval number must be marked on the outside of

the package.

* * * * *

PART 173--SHIPPERS--GENERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR SHIPMENTS AND

PACKAGINGS

8. The authority citation for Part 173 continues to read as

follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101-5127, 44701; 49 CFR 1.45, 1.53.

Sec. 173.21 [Amended]

9. In Sec. 173.21, in paragraph (k), the words ``or

Sec. 175.10(a)(24)'' are removed.

PART 175--CARRIAGE BY AIRCRAFT

10. The authority citation for Part 175 continues to read as

follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101-5127; 49 CFR 1.53.

Sec. 175.10 [Amended]

11. In Sec. 175.10, in paragraph (a)(7), the wording ``a

passenger'' is revised to read ``an onboard passenger'' and paragraph

(a)(24) is removed and reserved.

12. In Sec. 175.85, paragraph (d) is added to read as follows:

Sec. 175.85 Cargo location.

* * * * *

(d) No person may load or transport in a Class D cargo compartment,

as defined in 14 CFR 25.857(c), a package containing a hazardous

material for which an OXIDIZER or OXYGEN label is required under

Subpart E of Part 172 of this subchapter (see Sec. 172.426 or

Sec. 172.405 of this subchapter, respectively).

* * * * *

Issued in Washington, DC on December 20, 1996, under the

authority delegated in 49 CFR part 106.

Alan I. Roberts,

Associate Administrator for Hazardous Materials Safety.

[FR Doc. 96-33035 Filed 12-27-96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-60-P