Proposed Rule2025-12064
Hazardous Materials: Reducing Burdens on Domestic Aerosol Shippers
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
July 1, 2025
Issuing agencies
Transportation DepartmentPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
Abstract
This NPRM proposes to update the definition of an aerosol to eliminate unnecessary regulatory burdens and maintain consistency with current international transportation standards.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 90 Issue 124 (Tuesday, July 1, 2025)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 124 (Tuesday, July 1, 2025)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 28540-28544]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2025-12064]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
49 CFR Part 171
[Docket No. PHMSA-2025-0089 (HM-268A)]
RIN 2137-AG03
Hazardous Materials: Reducing Burdens on Domestic Aerosol
Shippers
AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This NPRM proposes to update the definition of an aerosol to
eliminate unnecessary regulatory burdens and maintain consistency with
current international transportation standards.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before September 2, 2025.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by the Docket Number
PHMSA-2025-0089 using any of the following methods:
E-Gov Web: <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>. This site allows the public
to enter comments on any Federal Register notice issued by any agency.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.
Mail: Docket Management System: U.S. Department of Transportation,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
Washington, DC 20590-0001.
Hand Delivery: U.S. DOT Docket Management System: West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
[[Page 28541]]
Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
Instructions: Please include the docket number PHMSA-2025-0089 at
the beginning of your comments. If you submit your comments by mail,
submit two copies. If you wish to receive confirmation that PHMSA
received your comments, include a self-addressed stamped postcard.
Internet users may submit comments at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>.
Note: Comments are posted without changes or edits to <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>, including any personal information provided.
There is a privacy statement published on <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>.
Privacy Act: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits
comments from the public to inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts
these comments, without edit, including any personal information the
commenter provides, to <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>, as described in the
system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
<a href="https://www.dot.gov/privacy">https://www.dot.gov/privacy</a>.
Confidential Business Information: Confidential Business
Information (CBI) is commercial or financial information that is both
customarily and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA, 5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from
public disclosure. It is important that you clearly designate the
comments submitted as CBI if: your comments responsive to this document
contain commercial or financial information that is customarily treated
as private; you actually treat such information as private; and your
comment is relevant or responsive to this notice. You may ask PHMSA to
provide confidential treatment to information you give to the agency by
taking the following steps: (1) mark each page of the original document
submission containing CBI as ``Confidential''; (2) send PHMSA, along
with the original document, a second copy of the original document with
the CBI deleted; and (3) explain why the information that you are
submitting is CBI. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to Steven
Andrews, Standards and Rulemaking Division, Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), 2nd Floor, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590-0001, or by email at
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#780b0c1d0e1d165619161c0a1d0f0b381c170c561f170e"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="9be8effeedfef5b5faf5ffe9feece8dbfff4efb5fcf4ed">[email protected]</span></a>. Any materials PHMSA receives that is not
specifically designated as CBI will be placed in the public docket.
Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">http://www.regulations.gov</a>. Follow the online
instructions for accessing the docket. Alternatively, you may review
the documents in person at the street address listed above.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steven Andrews, Transportation
Regulations Specialist, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC
20590, 202-366-8553, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#4437302132212a6a252a203621333704202b306a232b32"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="2152554457444f0f404f455344565261454e550f464e57">[email protected]</span></a>.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Discussion
PHMSA proposes to revise the definition of an ``aerosol'' in 49 CFR
171.8, ``Definitions,'' to eliminate unnecessary regulatory burdens and
maintain consistency with current international transportation
standards. Historically, the Research and Special Programs
Administration (RSPA)--the predecessor agency to the Pipeline and
Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA)--differentiated
between a compressed gas as the primary product in a container and a
gas used solely as an aerosol propellant.\1\ However, after decades of
transportation outside the United States under the international
regulations' definition, PHMSA has preliminarily determined that this
distinction is unnecessary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 56 FR 55417 (Oct. 28, 1991).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR) currently define an
aerosol in 49 CFR 171.8 as ``an article consisting of any non-
refillable receptacle containing a gas compressed, liquefied or
dissolved under pressure, the sole purpose of which is to expel a
nonpoisonous (other than a Division 6.1 Packing Group III material)
liquid, paste, or powder and fitted with a self-closing release device
allowing the contents to be ejected by the gas.'' On September 28,
2017, PHMSA received a petition for rulemaking \2\ concerning that
definition from the Consumer Specialty Products Association (CSPA),
Council on Safe Transportation of Hazardous Articles, Inc. (COSTHA),
National Aerosol Association (NAA) and American Coatings Association
(ACA) (collectively, Joint Petitioners). In that petition, the Joint
Petitioners asked PHMSA to revise the HMR's definition of an aerosol to
align with the definitions found in the United Nations Recommendations
on the Transport of Dangerous Goods--Model Regulations (UNMR), the
International Maritime Dangerous Goods (IMDG) Code, the International
Civil Aviation Organization Technical Instructions on the Safe
Transport of Dangerous Goods by Air (ICAO TI), and the Regulations
governing European Road Transport (ADR). The Joint Petitioners noted
that the HMR's definition for aerosol is inconsistent with its
international counterpart, which does not include the limitation for
gas to be used to expel a liquid, paste, or powder. Without
harmonization, this results in pure gases being shipped as fully
regulated compressed gases under the HMR. The exclusion of pure gases
from the aerosol definition can significantly impact their regulation
under the HMR, including requirements for packaging (DOT-specification
cylinder versus DOT-2P or 2Q inner receptacle), hazard communication,
and classification. Currently, PHMSA has special permits issued that
allow the transportation of pure gases that are provided regulatory
relief similar to shipments of aerosols meeting the international
definition. Three examples of such special permits are DOT-SP 10232,
DOT-SP 11516, and DOT-SP 10704. These special permits have all been in
place for thirty years or more and have no reported safety incidents.
On April 2, 2019, PHMSA responded to the Joint Petitioners by stating
that the proposed revision merited further consideration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ P-1707 (PHMSA-2017-0131).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lack of harmonization between the HMR and international standards
creates significant challenges for industry stakeholders engaged in
global commerce, leading to confusion, increased compliance costs, and
logistical inefficiencies, particularly for companies that manufacture,
package, or transport hazardous materials across borders. Lack of
harmonization also impedes trade, delays shipments, and reduces the
competitiveness of U.S. businesses in the global marketplace--all of
which can increase prices for U.S. consumers. Inconsistencies between
the HMR and international definitions of aerosol are no different, and
PHMSA is not aware of any transportation-related safety concerns which
justify that inconsistency. Therefore, PHMSA is proposing to revise the
definition of an aerosol in Sec. 171.8 to align with the international
definition and no longer require that an aerosol be designed for the
sole purpose of expelling a liquid, paste or powder.
II. Regulatory Analysis and Notices
A. Legal Authority
This proposed rule is published under the authority of the
Secretary of Transportation set forth in the Federal Hazardous
Materials Transportation Laws (49 U.S.C. 5101 et seq.) and delegated to
the PHMSA Administrator pursuant to 49 CFR 1.97.
[[Page 28542]]
B. Executive Order 12866; Regulatory Planning and Review
Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 (``Regulatory Planning and
Review''),\3\ as implemented by DOT Order 2100.6B (``Policies and
Procedures for Rulemaking''), requires agencies to regulate in the
``most cost-effective manner,'' to make a ``reasoned determination that
the benefits of the intended regulation justify its costs,'' and to
develop regulations that ``impose the least burden on society.'' DOT
Order 2100.6B specifies that regulations should generally ``not be
issued unless their benefits are expected to exceed their costs.'' In
arriving at those conclusions, E.O. 12866 requires that agencies should
consider ``both quantifiable measures . . . and qualitative measures of
costs and benefits that are difficult to quantify'' and ``maximize net
benefits . . . unless a statute requires another regulatory approach.''
E.O. 12866 also requires that ``agencies should assess all costs and
benefits of available regulatory alternatives, including the
alternative of not regulating.'' DOT Order 2100.6B directs that PHMSA
and other Operating Administrations must generally choose the ``least
costly regulatory alternative that achieves the relevant objectives''
unless required by law or compelling safety need.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ 58 FR 51735 (Oct. 4, 1993).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
E.O. 12866 and DOT Order 2100.6B also require that PHMSA submit
``significant regulatory actions'' to the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) within the Executive Office of the
President's Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review. This
proposed rule is a not significant regulatory action pursuant to E.O.
12866; it also has not designated this rule as a ``major rule'' as
defined by the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.).
PHMSA has complied with the requirements in E.O. 12866 as
implemented by DOT Order 2100.6B and preliminarily determined that this
proposed rule will result in cost savings by reducing regulatory
burdens and regulatory uncertainty for manufacturers and shippers of
aerosols. PHMSA expects that cost savings will focus on those related
to the reduction in burden for new special permit applications (e.g.,
new entrants to the market) and renewals for current special permit
holders, as well as cost savings from the ability to transition to a
single system of marks, labels, and documentation for domestic and
international transport. PHMSA expects those cost savings will result
in reduced costs for U.S. consumers to whom those entities generally
transfer a portion of their compliance costs.
The change to align the HMR definition of aerosols with
international standards (including the UN Model Regulations, IMDG Code,
ICAO Technical Instructions, and ADR) is not expected to impose any new
direct costs on U.S. aerosol manufacturers, shippers, or federal
regulatory agencies. The revision will expand regulatory flexibility by
permitting the classification of gas-only aerosols without
necessitating the presence of a liquid, paste, or powder. As a result,
there are no new compliance, implementation, or oversight burdens
anticipated.
The change offers multiple sources of cost savings and regulatory
relief. The current U.S. definition excludes gas-only aerosols from
qualifying for limited quantity exceptions, requiring their treatment
as fully regulated hazardous materials. Aligning with international
standards would eliminate added costs for qualifying products,
streamlining logistics and reducing compliance burdens, such as,
preparation of shipping papers, payment of hazmat transportation
surcharges, investment in extensive employee training, additional
requirements for storage and documentation. In addition, companies
currently operating under special permits to ship gas-only aerosols
incur labor and administrative costs related to marking packages, using
specific packaging, maintaining, and renewing permits every two to four
years, providing permit-specific training to relevant staff. PHMSA has
issued dozens of special permits in different forms that allow for the
transportation of pure gases in a manner equivalent to using the
international definition of an aerosol. Examples of operational
controls under these special permits include relaxation of the
packaging requirements to allow transportation DOT-2P, 2Q, or similar
inner receptacles, and elimination of shipping papers, and placarding
requirements. Elimination of the special permit requirement would
produce direct labor cost savings and reduce administrative overhead
for both the private sector and PHMSA. Harmonization with international
definitions would simplify cross-border trade by eliminating
inconsistencies in classification and labeling. U.S. companies
currently face trade friction when exporting aerosols that qualify
under international definitions but not under U.S. rules. By adopting
the broader international standard, U.S. manufacturers and marketers
would gain improved access to the global aerosol market. This change
would enhance the international competitiveness of U.S. aerosol
products, enabling companies to increase market share and reduce
barriers to export. The regulatory change is broadly expected to
increase efficiency in transportation and logistics, lower product
costs for businesses and potentially for consumers, and foster economic
activity by reducing barriers to entry.
In summary, PHMSA requests feedback from stakeholders on: (1) the
overall economic impact of the proposed HMR revisions; (2) the overall
expected impact on the transportation of aerosol products and their
prices, and (3) the anticipated market impact of the proposed
revisions. PHMSA also welcomes any comments from stakeholders on
anticipated specific economic impacts of the proposed rule.
C. Executive Orders 14192 and 14219
This proposed rule, if finalized as proposed, is expected to be an
E.O. 14192 deregulatory action.\4\ PHMSA seeks data that would be
helpful to generate an estimate of the cost savings from this rule.
PHMSA's initial estimates are that the total costs of the rule on the
regulated community will be less than zero. Nor does this proposed rule
does implicate any of the factors identified in section 2(a) of E.O.
14219 indicative of a regulation that is ``unlawful . . . [or] that
undermine[s] the national interest.'' \5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ 90 FR 9065 (Jan. 31, 2025).
\5\ 90 FR 10583 (Feb. 19, 2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. Energy-Related Executive Orders 13211, 14154, and 14156
The President has declared in E.O. 14156 (``Declaring a National
Energy Emergency'') \6\ a national emergency to address the United
States's inadequate energy development production, transportation,
refining, and generation capacity. Similarly, E.O. 14154 (``Unleashing
American Energy'') \7\ asserts a Federal policy to unleash American
energy by ensuing access to abundant supplies of reliable, affordable
energy from (inter alia) the removal of ``undue burden[s]'' on the
identification, development, or use of domestic energy resources such
as PHMSA-jurisdictional affected entities. PHMSA preliminarily finds
this proposed rule is consistent with each of E.O. 14156 and E.O. 14154
because it will not impose any burden
[[Page 28543]]
on the transportation of energy or energy-related products.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ 90 FR 8353 (Jan. 29, 2025).
\7\ 90 FR 8353 (Jan. 29, 2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
However, this proposed rule is not a ``significant energy action''
under E.O. 13211 (``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly
Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use''),\8\ which requires
Federal agencies to prepare a Statement of Energy Effects for any
``significant energy action.'' Because this proposed rule is not a
significant action under E.O. 12866, it will not have a significant
adverse effect on supply, distribution, or energy use; and OIRA has
therefore not designated this proposed rule as a significant energy
action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ 66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
PHMSA analyzed this proposed rule in accordance with the principles
and criteria contained in E.O. 13132 (``Federalism'') \9\ and the
Presidential Memorandum (``Preemption'') published in the Federal
Register on May 22, 2009.\10\ E.O. 13132 requires agencies to assure
meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the
development of regulatory policies that may have ``substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the National
Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.'' The Federal
Hazardous Materials Transportation Laws contain an express preemption
provision at 49 U.S.C. 5125(b) that preempts state, local, and tribal
requirements on certain covered subjects, unless the non-federal
requirements are ``substantively the same'' as the federal
requirements, including the following:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ 64 FR 43255 (Aug. 10, 1999).
\10\ 74 FR 24693 (May 22, 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) The designation, description, and classification of hazardous
material;
(2) The packing, repacking, handling, labeling, marking, and
placarding of hazardous material;
(3) The preparation, execution, and use of shipping documents
related to hazardous material and requirements related to the number,
contents, and placement of those documents;
(4) The written notification, recording, and reporting of the
unintentional release in transportation of hazardous material; and
(5) The design, manufacture, fabrication, inspection, marking,
maintenance, recondition, repair, or testing of a packaging or
container represented, marked, certified, or sold as qualified for use
in transporting hazardous material in commerce.
This proposed rule addresses covered subject items in paragraph I
above and would preempt state, local, and Tribal requirements not
meeting the ``substantively the same'' standard. While the proposed
rule may (when finalized) operate to preempt some State requirements,
it would not impose any regulation that has substantial direct effects
on the States, the relationship between the National Government and the
States, or the distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government. The preemptive effect of the regulatory
amendments in this proposed rule is limited to the minimum level
necessary to achieve the objectives of the Federal Hazardous Materials
Transportation Laws. Therefore, the consultation and funding
requirements of E.O. 13132 do not apply.
F. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires
Federal agencies to conduct an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
(IRFA) for a proposed rule subject to notice-and-comment rulemaking
under the APA unless the agency head certifies that the proposed rule
in the rulemaking will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. E.O. 13272 (``Proper
Consideration of Small Entities in Agency Rulemaking'') \11\ obliges
agencies to establish procedures promoting compliance with the
Regulatory Flexibility Act. DOT posts its implementing guidance on a
dedicated web page.\12\ This proposed rule was developed in accordance
with E.O. 13272 and DOT implementing guidance to ensure compliance with
the Regulatory Flexibility Act. The proposed rule is expected to reduce
burdens. Therefore, PHMSA certifies the proposed rule does not have a
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ 67 FR 53461 (Aug. 16, 2002).
\12\ DOT, ``Rulemaking Requirements Related to Small Entities,''
<a href="https://www.transportation.gov/regulations/">https://www.transportation.gov/regulations/</a> rulemaking-requirements-
concerning-small-entities (last accessed Sept 3, 2024).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
G. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.)
requires agencies to assess the effects of Federal regulatory actions
on State, local, and Tribal governments, and the private sector. For
any proposed or direct final rule that includes a Federal mandate that
may result in the expenditure by state, local, and Tribal governments,
in the aggregate of $100 million or more (in 1996 dollars) in any given
year, the agency must prepare, amongst other things, a written
statement that qualitatively and quantitatively assesses the costs and
benefits of the Federal mandate.
This proposed rule does not impose unfunded mandates under UMRA
because it does not result in costs of $100 million or more (in 1996
dollars) per year for either State, local, or Tribal governments, or to
the private sector.
H. National Environmental Policy Act
The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA, 42 U.S.C. 4321 et
seq.) requires that Federal agencies assess and consider the impact of
major Federal actions on the human and natural environment.
PHMSA analyzed this proposed rule in accordance with NEPA and has
preliminarily determined that the rulemaking will not adversely affect
safety and therefore will not significantly affect the quality of the
human and natural environment. The public is invited to comment on the
impact of the proposed action.
I. Executive Order 13175
PHMSA analyzed this proposed rule according to the principles and
criteria in E.O. 13175 (``Consultation and Coordination with Indian
Tribal Governments'') \13\ and DOT Order 5301.1A (``Department of
Transportation Tribal Consultation Policies and Procedures''). E.O.
13175 requires agencies to assure meaningful and timely input from
Tribal government representatives in the development of rules that
significantly or uniquely affect Tribal communities by imposing
``substantial direct compliance costs'' or ``substantial direct
effects'' on such communities or the relationship or distribution of
power between the Federal government and Tribes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ 65 FR 67249 (Nov. 9, 2000).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
PHMSA assessed the impact of the proposed rule and determined that
it will not significantly or uniquely affect Tribal communities or
Indian Tribal governments. The rulemaking's regulatory amendments have
a broad, national scope; therefore, this proposed rule will not
significantly or uniquely affect Tribal communities, much less impose
substantial compliance costs on Native American Tribal governments or
mandate Tribal action. For these reasons, PHMSA has concluded that the
funding and consultation requirements of E.O. 13175 and DOT Order
5301.1A do not apply.
[[Page 28544]]
J. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) and its
implementing regulations at 5 CFR 1320.8(d) requires that PHMSA provide
interested members of the public and affected agencies with an
opportunity to comment on information collection and recordkeeping
requests. This rulemaking will not create, amend, or rescind any
existing information collections. There is potential for a slight
reduction in the number of shipping papers required under OMB Control
Number 2137-0034, ``Hazardous Materials Shipping Papers & Emergency
Response Information,'' due to aerosols being shipped as limited
quantities. However, this reduction is expected to be minimal and
difficult to quantify in relation to the overall shipping paper burden.
K. Executive Order 13609 and International Trade Analysis
E.O. 13609 (``Promoting International Regulatory Cooperation'')
\14\ requires agencies consider whether the impacts associated with
significant variations between domestic and international regulatory
approaches are unnecessary or may impair the ability of American
business to export and compete internationally. In meeting shared
challenges involving health, safety, labor, security, environmental,
and other issues, international regulatory cooperation can identify
approaches that are at least as protective as those that are or would
be adopted in the absence of such cooperation. International regulatory
cooperation can also reduce, eliminate, or prevent unnecessary
differences in regulatory requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ 77 FR 26413 (May 4, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Similarly, the Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (Pub. L. 96-39), as
amended by the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (Pub. L. 103-465),
prohibits Federal agencies from establishing any standards or engaging
in related activities that create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign
commerce of the United States. For purposes of these requirements,
Federal agencies may participate in the establishment of international
standards, so long as the standards have a legitimate domestic
objective, such as providing for safety, and do not operate to exclude
imports that meet this objective. The statute also requires
consideration of international standards and, where appropriate, that
they be the basis for U.S. standards.
PHMSA engages with international standards setting bodies to
protect the safety of the American public. PHMSA has assessed the
effects of the proposed rule and has determined that its regulatory
amendments will not cause unnecessary obstacles to foreign trade.
L. Cybersecurity and Executive Order 14028
E.O. 14028 (``Improving the Nation's Cybersecurity'') \15\ directed
the Federal government to improve its efforts to identify, deter, and
respond to ``persistent and increasingly sophisticated malicious cyber
campaigns.'' PHMSA has considered the effects of the proposed rule and
has determined that its regulatory amendments would not materially
affect the cybersecurity risk profile for affected entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ 86 FR 26633 (May 17, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 171
Exports, Hazardous materials transportation, Hazardous waste,
Imports, Incorporation by reference, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
In consideration of the foregoing, PHMSA proposes to amend 49 CFR
chapter I as follows:
PART 171--GENERAL INFORMATION, REGULATIONS, AND DEFINITIONS
0
1. The authority citation for part 171 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101-5128, 44701; Pub. L. 101-410 section
4; Pub. L. 104-134, section 31001; Pub. L. 114-74 section 701 (28
U.S.C. 2461 note); 49 CFR 1.81 and 1.97.
0
2. In Sec. 171.8, revise the definition of ``Aerosol'' to read as
follows:
Sec. 171.8 Definitions.
* * * * *
Aerosol means an article consisting of a non-refillable receptacle
containing a gas (compressed, liquefied, or dissolved under pressure),
with or without a nonpoisonous (other than a Division 6.1 Packing Group
III material) liquid, paste, or powder, and fitted with a self-closing
release device allowing the contents to be ejected as a foam, paste, or
powder or in a liquid state or in a gaseous state.
* * * * *
Issued in Washington, DC, on June 26, 2025, under the authority
delegated in 49 CFR 1.97.
Benjamin D. Kochman,
Acting Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2025-12064 Filed 6-27-25; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4910-60-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on July 1, 2025.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.