Hazardous Materials; Retention of Shipping Papers

November 13, 2001 Via Electronic Delivery Dockets Management System U.S. DOT, Room PL 401 400 Seventh Street SW. Washington, DC. 20590-0001 RE: Comments on Hazardous Materials: Retention of Shipping Papers. Docket # RSPA-01-10568 (HM- 207B). The Agricultural Retailers Association, Inc. (ARA) represents over 2000 companies operating out of more than 6,000 locations providing crop inputs and services to farmers. As the national representative of the agricultural retail industry, ARA is vitally interested in any regulation affecting the operation of facilities and equipment utilized in the nation's agricultural sector. Ag retail companies conduct offloading, transfer, selling and shipping of farm inputs (seeds, plant nutrients and crop protectants) to farmers and other retail operations. ARA members also provide agronomic, environmental and technical services to insure proper management of crop inputs. Many are involved in the postharvest processing of biotech and other crops. ARA represents hundreds of small businesses as well as larger companies that deal with government regulations and standards on a daily basis and ARA welcomes the opportunity to comment on this issue. Please do not hesitate to contact me at 202457-0825 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Steve Hensley Director of Regulatory Affairs INTRODUCTION: RSPA is proposing to amend the Hazardous Materials Regulations to require shippers and carriers to retail a copy of each hazardous material shipping paper, or an electronic image thereof, for a period of 375 days after the date the hazardous material is accepted by a carrier. COMMENTS: The proposed rule adds additional requirements to offerors of hazardous materials (HM) but does not appear to have any safety benefits for HM transportation. There is a new date (acceptance date) added to recordkeeping which means a change in recordkeeping format for transporters at additional expense, but no apparent benefits. This action will require that record systems be changed from the existing `one year after transportation ends'(roughly paraphrased), to 375 days after acceptance by the carrier. Furthermore, since the shipping date will not longer be the primary datum point, the new "acceptance date" must be defined to determine when exactly that is. For example, if a transporter receives shipping papers, is that "acceptance"? Also, how will all forms be correctly dated if there is not backflow of information from the transporters to the shippers? CONCLUSION: This proposal appears to be arbitrary and capricious. There will be a cost involved to change recordkeeping systems that are based on one year and without apparent benefit economically or safety-wise. ARA thanks the agency for the opportunity to comment on this proposal.