Page images
PDF
EPUB

other related matters. In addition, statistics gathered from the field indicate that the remaining part-time hazardous materials coordinators have spent the average percentages shown in answer 8 on the inspection and enforcement of the hazardous materials regulations.

Question 4. Supply a yearly personnel breakdown from FY 69 to FY 77, and proposed estimates for FY 78 and FY 79, for trained, full-time hazardous materials field inspectors.

Answer. Prior to FY 74, FAA did not have a separate identifiable budget item for the hazardous materials program. In FY 74, the 18 regional hazardous materials coordinator positions were established which are considered field positions. The FAA does not plan to establish any additional full-time hazardous material positions. The increased workload shown in the table in answer 4 above will be accomplished by trained Flight Standards field inspectors who perform hazardous material inspections in addition to other safety activities.

Question 5. What is the percentage of time spent by hazardous materials field inspectors in 1973, 1974, and to date in 1975 on the inspection of hazardous materials. Are hazardous materials field inspectors assigned tasks other than the inspection of hazardous materials?

Answer. The 18 full-time hazardous materials coordinators in the field devote 100 percent of their time to the inspection, enforcement, and administration of hazardous materials matters. The remaining part-time hazardous materials inspectors have spent the following percentages of their time on the inspection and enforcement of hazardous materials. These percentages are estimates based on input from the field.

1973 1974

1975

Percent

8.3

11.6

18.8

Question 6. Supply a yearly budgetary breakdown from FY 69 to FY 77, and proposed estimates for FY 78 and FY 79, for the funds budgeted and the funds used for the training of hazardous materials inspectors.

AIR TRANSPORTATION OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS COURSE, COURSE DEVELOPMENT COST: $4,400

[blocks in formation]

Question 7. How many hazardous materials inspections were conducted by FAA hazardous materials inspectors, by quarter, during 1973, 1974, and to date in 1975. Please make separate estimates for those inspections carried out by GADO and ACDO hazardous materials inspectors.

Answer. The number of hazardous materials inspections conducted by quarter during 1973, 1974, and the first two quarters of 1975 by air carrier inspectors and general aviation inspectors are as follows:

Air Carrier Inspectors-prior to July 1, 1974:1

[blocks in formation]

1 NOTE. Prior to July 1, 1974, hazardous materials inspections were not required to be reported on the standard procedures for uniform reporting. The only figures available, other than those shown in the table, are that 9,073 inspections were conducted in fiscal year 1973, and 9,053 in fiscal year 1974 of which 4,220 were during the first 6 months of fiscal year 1974.

Question 8. List separately the number of violations and instances of noncompliance detected by GADO and ACDO hazardous materials inspections during 1973, 1974, and to date in 1975.

Answer. All violations or instances of noncompliance detected during 1973, 1974, and to date in 1975, were either corrected on the spot by the offender or they were processed as a violation. The FAA does not keep records of noncompliances that are corrected on the spot. The number of violations processed is indicated under answer 15.

Question 9. List separately the number of violations and instances of noncompliance processed by GADO and ACDO hazardous materials inspections during 1973, 1974, and to date in 1975.

[blocks in formation]

1 Due to the nature of the record keeping system used in 1973, we are unable to determine at this time which of these involved air carrier or general aviation inspectors.

Question 10. In those cases when a violation or noncompliance was detected but not processed, describe what actions were taken and what assurances there were that the regulations would be complied with in the future.

Answer. As discussed in item (8) above, if the noncompliance could not be corrected on the spot, a violation or noncompliance action was processed against the organization responsible for the noncompliance (shipper, carrier, or both). In all cases, the infraction was discussed with the person in charge of the facility. In the event the violation or noncompliance could not be corrected, the cargo was removed from air transportation and the shipper or freight forwarder was notified.

Question 11. In those cases processed, list by quarter the total number of warning notices, letters of correction, civil penalties, suspensions, revocations, and other actions (please define "other actions") initially recommended, and finally taken, against violators of regulations during 1973, 1974, and to date in 1975.

Answer. The question refers to actions taken by FAA which are listed below. The additional reference to "other actions" refers to those violation or noncompliance actions performed by people/organizations not under FAA regulatory requirements or not considered enforceable. These identities are U.S. military organizations, foreign shippers, or those violation reports that have an evidentiary deficiency or that have been declined by U.S. attorneys.

1973-We were not able to breakout the data by calendar quarter nor establish the number of violations initially recommended as opposed to the number processed. There were 237 cases involving noncompliance of which 2 were "other."

[blocks in formation]

Question 12. In a March 24, 1975 response to a letter of inquiry from Chairman Brooks, Administrator Butterfield stated that in response to NTSB Safety Recommendation A-74-25, "A new system for inspection of all packages of hazardous

materials before placing in the aircraft has been instituted." What is this system, when and to what extent was it instituted, and how successful has it been?

Answer. Since the draft study, FAR 103.4 governing "Inspection Requirements" has been added to the regulations by FAR Amendment 103-23, effective March 7, 1975. See page 2 of Enc. 2. In addition, FAR Amendment 103-23 added requirements for the scanning of radioactive material, and, in specified circumstances, any cargo compartment in which it has been carried. See Enc. 3. The original compliance date for scanning requirements, set out in 103.3 (d) (3) and 103.23 (c), was June 30, 1975. FAR Amendment 103-25 delayed the compliance date to January 1, 1976. See Enc. 5. The reason for delaying implementation was the need for more definitive specifications for the radiation monitoring instrument, the time needed by the instrument manufacturer to produce instruments in sufficient quantities, and the time needed by operators to train personnel in the use of the instrument. An NPRM is being drafted which proposes to establish specifications for the instrument to be used and modify the procedures for its use.

Question 13. Do exempted air taxi operators subcontract with other air taxi operators and use their aircraft and personnel for the transportation of hazardous materials?

Answer. No.

Question 14. Are any air taxi operators exempted to carry special nuclear materials or radioactive materials other than radioactive pharmaceuticals? If so, please identify.

Answer. Special nuclear materials (fissile materials) are prohibited under all existing exemptions for the carriage of radioactive materials. Any nonfissile radioactive materials authorized for carriage in air transportation may be carried.

Question 15. Are any air taxi operators exempted to transport materials such as nerve gas, germ agents, or any kind of etiological agents? If so, please identify.

Answer. No one is exempted to transport materials such as nerve gas or germ agents. Cultures of etiological agents of 50 milliliters or less in one outside package are not subject to the hazardous materials regulations (49 CFR 173.386). Quantities of etiological agents of over 50 milliliters to four liters are regulated with no exemption required for transportation by air.

Question 16. Does the FAA now issue any form whatsoever of administrative relief from the regulations governing the transportation of hazardous materials by air? If so, please specify the kind of administrative relief issued by FAA. Answer. No. Docket HM-127 (F.R. Vol. 40, No. 200-Wednesday, October 15, 1975) revoked all exemption, waiver, and other hazardous materials regulation relief authority previously in being and established new procedures whereby the Materials Transportation Bureau became the only agency authorized to grant such relief.

APPENDIX 2.-NEW EXEMPTION PROCEDURES OF THE MATERIALS TRANSPORTATION BUREAU (EXCERPT FROM THE FEDERAL REGISTER OF OCTOBER 15, 1975)

PART III: DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION-FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, COAST GUARD, MATERIALS TRANSPORTATION

BUREAU

TRANSPORTATION OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS-EXEMPTION PROCEDURES

TITLE 14-AERONAUTICS AND SPACE

CHAPTER I-FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION [Docket No. HM-127]

PART 103-TRANSPORTATION OF DANGEROUS ARTICLES AND MAGNETIZED MATERIALS

REVOCATION OF AUTHORITY TO DEVIATE

For the reasons set forth in a document establishing new procedures governing exemptions from the Department of Transportation's regulations pertaining to the transportation of hazardous materials appearing elsewhere in this Part III of the FEDERAL REGISTER, 14 CFR 103.5 is revoked effective October 16, 1975. (49 U.S.C. 1421 (c), 49 CFR 1.53 (h)).

Issued in Washington, D.C., on October 10, 1975.

[blocks in formation]

PART 146-TRANSPORTATION OR STORAGE OF EXPLOSIVES OR OTHER DANGEROUS ARTICLES OR SUBSTANCES AND COMBUSTIBLE LIQUIDS ON BOARD VESSELS

EXEMPTION PROCEDURES

For the reasons set forth in a document establishing new procedures governing exemptions from the Department of Transportation's regulations pertaining to the transportation of hazardous materials appearing elsewhere in this Part III of the FEDERAL REGISTER, 46 CFR 146.02-25 is amended as follows effective October 16, 1975:

§ 146.02-25 [Amended]

1. Paragraph (a) is amended by adding the words "Except as provided in paragraph (f) of this section," at the beginning thereof.

2. Paragraph (d) is amended by adding the words "Except as provided in paragraph (f) of this section," at the beginning thereof.

3. By adding a new paragraph at the end thereof to read as follows:

(f) Petitions for exemptions or any other form of administrative relief from any requirement of this Part 146 shall be prepared and submitted to the Direc(59)

tor, Office of Hazardous Materials Operations, in accordance with 49 CFR Part 107, Subpart B.

(46 U.S.C. 170 (11), 49 CFR 1.53 (f)).

Issued in Washington, D.C., on October 10, 1975.

JAMES T. CURTIS, Jr.,

Director,

Materials Transportation Bureau,

[FR Doc. 75-27805 Filed 10-14-75; 8:45 am]

RULES AND REGULATIONS

TITLE 49-TRANSPORTATION

SUBTITLE B-OTHER REGULATIONS RELATING TO TRANSPORTATION

CHAPTER I-MATERIALS TRANSPORTATION BUREAU, DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION

[Docket No. HM-127]

HAZARDOUS MATERIALS TRANSPORTATION

ESTABLISHMENT OF EXEMPTION PROCEDURES

On August 4, 1975, the Office of Hazardous Materials Operations published in the Federal Register (49 CFR 32758) a notice of proposed rule making in which it proposed a new set of procedures to be followed in applying for and in the processing of requests for exemptions from the Department of Transportation's regulations governing the transportation of hazardous materials. These procedures would implement the statutory requirements of section 107 of the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act (Title I of Pub. L. 93-633).

As provided in that notice of proposed rule making, interested persons were given until the close of business on September 12, 1975, to submit comments and a public hearing was held in Washington, D.C., on August 26, 1975. In response to the considerable interest expressed by persons shipping and transporting hazardous materials via aircraft in or to Alaska, a second public hearing was scheduled for Anchorage (40 FR 37247, August 26, 1975) and held there on September 2, 1975. The Materials Transportation Bureau has given due consideration to the comments received and has adopted the proposal with the modifications set forth below.

GENERAL ARRANGEMENT

As proposed the exemption procedures would have been Subpart A of Part 107. The Bureau has decided to move them to Subpart B and use Subpart A for general procedural provisions applicable to the hazardous materials program. A section on definitions and one covering request for confidential treatment of documents are included in this rule making. Other general procedural provisions will be added to Subpart A as they are developed. For the convenience of those who may wish to make a direct comparison between the proposed provisions and the final provisions, a table of comparative section numbers is set forth below:

[blocks in formation]
« PreviousContinue »