PACE International Union — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation

Page 1U.S. Department of Transportation 400 Seventh St., S.W. Research and Washington, D.C. 20590 Speciai Programs Administration JUL 15 2003 Mr. Rickie Bearden Operating Vice President Ref. No. 02-0304 PACE International Union Local 5-727 P.O. Box 405 Calvert City, KY 42029 Dear Mr. Bearden: This is in response to your December 2, 2002 letter concerning the monitoring of tank car unloading operations under the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180). Specifically, you request that I review my response to Mr. Joe Campbell of Air Products and Chemicals dated February 22, 2002 as it pertains to his monitoring system fulfilling the requirements outlined in the formal interpretation of the regulations, 87-4-RSPA. From the information you provided it appears that more than one individual plays a role in the unloading process of the tank car. The HMR do not prohibit such a practice so long as a qualified and trained operator is monitoring the unloading process. Therefore, I must reiterate that my February 22, 2002 interpretation remains unchanged. An authorized electronic monitoring system must meet the four criteria outlined in the letter of formal interpretation, 87-4-RSPA: An employee is made responsible for unloading and is familiar with the nature and properties of the material being unloaded; The employee responsible for unloading is instructed in the procedures to be followed during unloading and in the event of an emergency, and has the authority and ability to halt the flow of product immediately and take emergency action; 3) In the event of an emergency, the system must be capable of immediately halting the flow of product or alerting the employee responsible for unloading; and The monitoring device must provide immediate notification of any malfunction to 174.67 020304#

Page 2: the person responsible for unloading, or the device is checked hourly for malfunctions. Also, if the proposed non-human monitoring system becomes disabled or inoperable, the unloading operator must constantly observe the unloading operation. I hope this satisfies your request. Sincerely, Susan Dooky Susan Gorsky Senior Transportation Regulatins Specialist Office of Hazardous Materials Standards ..........#

Page 3Johnsen • Energy Work PACE 5174.67 Rail 02-0384 Allied Industrial, Paper Energy Workers hemica &: Union International FL-CIO, CLC November 19, 2002 LOCAL 5-727 Delmer F. Billings Office of Hazardous Materials Standards Chief, Standards Development Ref. No. 02-0027 Dear Mr. Billings: This is in reference to your response on February 22, 2002 to Mr. Joe Campbell, Process Engineer ising electronic controls in offloading Ethylene, specifically to meet the requirements of 174.6° or Air Products and Chemicals in Calvert City, Kentucky. Mr. Campbell's presentation to you o you outlined in your response to Mr. Campbell, the Union has areas of concern based on the (D) of FIRM; 49 CFR Parts 171-180 Hazards Matcrials Regulations. Of the four items of criteria information that Mir. Campbell presented to you. to explain our position on Mr. Campbells intent. we have included the four points of criteria in your letter and our concerns on these points to try 1) An employee is made responsible for unloading and is familiar with the nature and properties of the material being unloaded; We feel that an employee in the unloading department will meet this criteria, but the we do not expect activities, primarily hooking up and starting the off loading process. responsibility of this employee to the unloading will only be a part of their daily ine duty. employees to have The employee responsible for unloading is instructed in the procedures to be followed during unloading and in the event of an emergency, and has the authority and ability to halt the flow of product immediately and take emergency action; The unlodon, appertin It is acceptible for 3) In the event of an emergency, the system must be capable of immediately halting the now of to monitor fa product or alerting the employee responsible for unloading: unlanding process. PO. Box 405 The Union feels that this type of system should have already been in place. calvert Cit entucky 4202 4) The monitoring device must provide immediate notification of any malfunction to the person 502.395.4403 phone: responsible for unloading, or the device is checked hourly for malfunctions.#

Page 4.. d PACE tell Allied-Industrial, Paper, Chemical & International Energy Workers AFL-CIO, CLC Union manito Mr. Campbell's concept will not notify the person responsible for the unloading process, LOCAL 5-727 rather it will notify the person doing the momtoring. The Umon knows there will be a delay between the monitor person trying to convey any, information to the person who is responsible for checks will not happen primarily because this defeats the purpose of this change, which is to free the off loading process, this period of time could be considerable. The Union feels the hourly Mr Bite el the union eires the once presented bit main line one a esponsibilities, the employees are already doing multiple simultaneous work duties Inion feels the responsibility of the operators will be watered down simply due to the increase it Thank you Mr. Billings for your time and we would appreciate your views on our concerns. Sincerely, 26b6 Rickie Bearden PACE Local 5-727 Operating Vice President Calvert City, Ky 270-395-4403 PO. Box 405 Kentucky 42029 502.395.4403#