2012 TECHNICAL CONFERENCE Plenary Session Tank Vehicle Definition/DOT Penalty Actions

2012 Technical Conference Tank Vehicle Definition In 2011 FMCSA adopted new def. of “tank vehicle” that included filled or empty IBCs above 119 gallons capacity. In 2011 FMCSA adopted new def. of “tank vehicle” that included filled or empty IBCs above 119 gallons capacity. Old definition: Individual tanks above 1000 gallons Old definition: Individual tanks above 1000 gallons

2012 Technical Conference Tank Vehicle (cont.) Nobody noticed problems until fall. Nobody noticed problems until fall. - IP coalition formed with ATA, ACA, RIPA and a dozen other associations. Issue for RIPA: All drivers moving 4 or more 275 gallon IBCs would have to obtain a tank endorsement on CDL Issue for RIPA: All drivers moving 4 or more 275 gallon IBCs would have to obtain a tank endorsement on CDL

2012 Technical Conference Tank Vehicle (cont.) Tank endorsements require Tank endorsements require Trip to state DMV Trip to state DMV Paper test (in some cases driving, also) Paper test (in some cases driving, also) Payment for endorsement Payment for endorsement

2012 Technical Conference ATA petitioned, with support of RIPA and other groups ATA petitioned, with support of RIPA and other groups ATA obtained agreement from FMCSA to re-write the definition. ATA obtained agreement from FMCSA to re-write the definition. Likely outcome: Old definition (1000 gal.) Likely outcome: Old definition (1000 gal.)

2012 Technical Conference DOT Penalty Reports for 2010

2012 Technical Conference DOT issues a “Penalty Report” annually DOT issues a “Penalty Report” annually 2010 report lists over 500 companies 2010 report lists over 500 companies Total fines for 2010 = $1,533,000 Total fines for 2010 = $1,533,000

2012 Technical Conference Fine Breakdown 334 (66%) – shippers 334 (66%) – shippers 83 (16%) – carriers 83 (16%) – carriers 60 (12%) – cylinder tester/re-tester 60 (12%) – cylinder tester/re-tester 22 (4.3%) – Packaging Manufacturer 22 (4.3%) – Packaging Manufacturer 11 (2.2%) – Reconditioner 11 (2.2%) – Reconditioner

2012 Technical Conference

13,500 chemical manufacturing sites in U.S. 13,500 chemical manufacturing sites in U.S. In 2010 DOT issued 334 fines In 2010 DOT issued 334 fines Chance of fine = 1 in 50 (2%) Chance of fine = 1 in 50 (2%) 175 industrial packaging mfg’ing and reconditioning sites in U.S. 175 industrial packaging mfg’ing and reconditioning sites in U.S. In 2010 DOT issued 33 fines In 2010 DOT issued 33 fines Chance of fine = 1 in 5 (20%) Chance of fine = 1 in 5 (20%)

2012 Technical Conference Top Inspection Issues Cited by DOT Failed to maintain proper test records (4) Failed to maintain proper test records (4) Failed to provide initial, general awareness, function specific or security training (4) Failed to provide initial, general awareness, function specific or security training (4) Failed to provide closure instructions to persons to whom packaging was sold (4) Failed to provide closure instructions to persons to whom packaging was sold (4)

2012 Technical Conference Top Inspection Issues Cited by DOT Inaccurate test reports (2) Inaccurate test reports (2) Failed to conduct design type tests (2) Failed to conduct design type tests (2) Failed to properly mark steel drum (2) Failed to properly mark steel drum (2) Failed to apply 12 mm high marks on an IBC (2) Failed to apply 12 mm high marks on an IBC (2)

2012 Technical Conference Top Inspection Issues Cited by DOT Failed to keep records of companies to which closure notifications were sent Failed to keep records of companies to which closure notifications were sent Rule says companies must retain copies of “each written notification for the amount of time that aligns with…period retest date, i.e. every 12 months…” [remanufactured units] Rule says companies must retain copies of “each written notification for the amount of time that aligns with…period retest date, i.e. every 12 months…” [remanufactured units]

2012 Technical Conference Other Regulatory Issues of Interest 1)Company sells plastic drum with embossed UN mark for non-haz use; no reconditioner mark on drum. DOT claims UN mark must be taken off drum. 2)“M” in company identifier was lower case (i.e. “m”)

2012 Technical Conference Other regulatory issues (cont.) Is an 11/8/11 drum reconditionable? Is an 11/8/11 drum reconditionable?

2012 Technical Conference THANK YOU