This site displays a prototype of a “Web 2.0” version of the daily
Federal Register. It is not an official legal edition of the Federal
Register, and does not replace the official print version or the official
electronic version on GPO’s govinfo.gov.
The documents posted on this site are XML renditions of published Federal
Register documents. Each document posted on the site includes a link to the
corresponding official PDF file on govinfo.gov. This prototype edition of the
daily Federal Register on FederalRegister.gov will remain an unofficial
informational resource until the Administrative Committee of the Federal
Register (ACFR) issues a regulation granting it official legal status.
For complete information about, and access to, our official publications
and services, go to
About the Federal Register
on NARA's archives.gov.
The OFR/GPO partnership is committed to presenting accurate and reliable
regulatory information on FederalRegister.gov with the objective of
establishing the XML-based Federal Register as an ACFR-sanctioned
publication in the future. While every effort has been made to ensure that
the material on FederalRegister.gov is accurately displayed, consistent with
the official SGML-based PDF version on govinfo.gov, those relying on it for
legal research should verify their results against an official edition of
the Federal Register. Until the ACFR grants it official status, the XML
rendition of the daily Federal Register on FederalRegister.gov does not
provide legal notice to the public or judicial notice to the courts.
Notice
Enter a search term or FR citation e.g.
88 FR 38230 FR 78782024-13208USDA09/05/24RULE0503-AA39SORN
Choosing an item from
full text search results
will bring you to those results. Pressing enter in the search box
will also bring you to search results.
Choosing an item from
suggestions
will bring you directly to the content.
Thank you for taking the time to create a comment. Your input is important.
Once you have filled in the required fields below you can preview and/or submit your comment to the Transportation Department for review. All comments are considered public and will be posted online once the Transportation Department has reviewed them.
This table of contents is a navigational tool, processed from the
headings within the legal text of Federal Register documents.
This repetition of headings to form internal navigation links
has no substantive legal effect.
FederalRegister.gov retrieves relevant information about this document
from Regulations.gov to provide users with additional context. This
information is not part of the official Federal Register document.
Safety Alert; Risk Associated with Liquid Petroleum (LP) Gas Odor Fade
Document page views are updated periodically throughout the day and are
cumulative counts for this document. Counts are subject to sampling,
reprocessing and revision (up or down) throughout the day.
Page views
2,439
as of
09/08/2026 at 10:15 pm EDT
Other Formats
Enhanced Content - Other Formats
This document is also available in the following formats:
This PDF is FR Doc. 2013-17120 as it appeared on Public Inspection on
07/16/2013 at 8:45 am.
If you are using public inspection listings for legal research, you
should verify the contents of the documents against a final, official
edition of the Federal Register. Only official editions of the
Federal Register provide legal notice of publication to the public and judicial notice
to the courts under 44 U.S.C. 1503 & 1507.
Learn more here.
Published Document: 2013-17120 (78 FR 42818)
This document has been published in the Federal Register. Use the PDF linked in the document sidebar for the official electronic format.
AGENCY:
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), DOT.
ACTION:
Safety Alert Notice.
SUMMARY:
PHMSA is issuing this safety alert to notify the public of the risks associated with the under-odorization of Liquefied Petroleum Gases (LPG). LPG is an odorless and colorless gas that under certain conditions is required to be odorized for leak detection. The purpose of this alert is to advise shippers and carriers of the recommended procedures to ensure that LPG is properly odorized by all modes of transportation.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Charles Betts, Director, (email:
charles.betts@dot.gov)
or Delmer Billings, Senior Regulatory Advisor (email:
delmer.billings@dot.gov), Standards and Rulemaking Division, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington DC 20590. Telephone: (202) 366-8553, Fax: (202) 366-7435.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
PHMSA is aware of several incidents possibly attributed to either the under-odorization or odorant fade of liquefied petroleum gas (LPG). Most notable of these incidents is one that happened in Norfolk, MA on July 30, 2010 where an explosion occurred at a residential condominium complex that was under construction. Emergency responders from 21 cities/towns deployed personnel to the accident site. The accident resulted in seven injuries and one fatality.
The subsequent investigation raised questions as to whether there was a sufficient level of odorant in the LPG contained in the on-site storage tanks. In accordance with Federal and State laws and regulations, LPG intended for use by non-industrial entities is generally required to be odorized, or stenched, to enable the detection of any unintended release or leak of the gas. LPG is highly flammable and dangerous to inhale in large quantities. The added odorant is a safety precaution that helps warn those in the area that a release of gas has occurred. In the Norfolk incident, there appeared to be no warning, i.e. odorant smell, prior to the explosion, that the on-site LPG storage tank was leaking. PHMSA has consulted with stakeholders from industry, fire fighter associations, and other regulatory agencies in order to better understand the root cause of incidents like the one in Norfolk. Although additional research may be necessary in order to come to more definitive conclusions, PHMSA has identified situations in which the risks of under-odorization or odor fade are more likely to occur. These situations are outlined below along with recommendations to mitigate potential risk factors that might lead to preventable outcomes.
Injection Process:
On December 13, 2012, PHMSA met with representatives from the National Propane Gas Association (NPGA) to gain a better understanding of the LPG odorization process. During this meeting, representatives from the NPGA stated that the most common method for the odorization of LPG is through an automated system. However, the NPGA also noted there are situations where the odorization process is manually performed. Preliminary investigations into the Norfolk, MA incident suggest that the lack of sufficient odorization rendered the LPG undetectable when the on-site storage tank began to leak. In situations where the injection process is not fully automated, the potential for human error may increase the possibility of under-odorization. We believe that the insufficient level of odorant in the LPG contained in the on-site storage tank involved in the Norfolk, MA incident was likely a major contributing factor in restricting the ability of on-site personnel to readily detect the leak. Therefore, in this safety alert, PHMSA recommends that when the odorization of LPG is being accomplished by a manual injection process, quality control checks should be conducted to ensure that the requisite amount of odorant is being injected. Additionally, PHMSA recommends that when odorization of LPG is automatically injected, equipment calibration checks should be periodically performed to ensure consistent injection levels of the required odorant.
New Tanks or Freshly Cleaned Tanks:
During our meetings with various stakeholders, several indicated that a phenomenon known as “odor fade” may be a problem when new or recently cleaned tanks are used. New or recently cleaned tanks may absorb the odorant into the metal shell of these tanks, thus limiting the effectiveness of the remaining odorant in the LPG. Based on
( printed page 42819)
this belief, we recommend that persons who receive new or recently cleaned tanks be notified of this fact and that persons filling these tanks implement appropriate quality control measures to ensure that potential odorant fade is adequately addressed. Such quality control measures will ensure that when delivered to end users, the LPG has sufficient odorant to be detected should a leak occur.
Odorization Standards:
The odorization of LPG is addressed by a myriad of Federal and State laws and regulations, as well as, by accepted industry standards and practices. When offered and transported in commerce, the HMR specifies that
all
LPG in cargo and portable tanks be effectively odorized using either 1.0 pound of ethyl mercaptan, 1.0 pound of thiopane, or 1.4 pounds of amyl mercaptan per 10,000 gallons of LPG, in the event of an unintended release or leak to indicate the presence of gas. The HMR do not, however, require LPG to be ordorized if odorization would be harmful in the use or further processing of the LPG, or if odorization will serve no useful purpose as a warning agent in such use or further processing. Essentially, this exception applies to LPG being transported to industrial end-users.
Although the HMR requires odorization of LPG in cargo tanks and portable tanks, there are no such requirements in the HMR for rail tank car tanks and cylinders. Therefore, in this safety alert, PHMSA recommends that all LPG transported in rail tank car tanks or cylinders be odorized in accordance with the requirements of § 173.315(b)(1), of the HMR, unless odorization would be harmful in the use or further processing of the LPG, or if odorization will serve no useful purpose as a warning agent in such use or further processing.
Issued in Washington, DC on July 12, 2013.
Magdy El-Sibaie,
Associate Administrator for Hazardous Materials Safety, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration.
Comments on this document are being accepted at Regulations.gov. Submit a public comment