Hauling Hazmat in CVs and Sprinters???
- Thread starter hazmat
- Start date
I ceased doing that long, long time ago. As a matter of fact, to make sure they don't force me to take any HM load, I dropped the HM endorsement.
chefdennis
Veteran Expediter
Paint, some cleanibg solutions...nothing over 1000 and no MSDS..and no logging, placards or bulkhead....
Last edited:
Scientist are studying the effects of tree huggers; worried that the tree's growth is being disrupted by blocking the sun and cutting off oxygen?!?!
Did it bother you not knowing what was in the cleaner (incase you were in an accident)??? Some cleaners are caustic and an inhalation hazard...
Speaking of batteries, see attached
Nothing wrong with that... If you're not comfortable, don't do it... Always check you gut...
chefdennis
Veteran Expediter
Originally Posted by chefdennis
hazmat wrote:
Ahhh nope not at all.. As for inhaling caustic fumes, i have 2 really large 6 volt batteries sitting in the foot well in front of where the passenger seat use to sit. They are charged by the alternator as i drive down the road...not much more caustic the boiling battery acid.....and i breath the air in the van every day only have minor hazmat stuff in here a few times a yr, not worth any worryin on my part...and those batteries, they have been there in the same place in 2 different vans for almost 6 yrs...and the "max O2" test i took a few yrs back was just fine....
hazmat wrote:
Ahhh nope not at all.. As for inhaling caustic fumes, i have 2 really large 6 volt batteries sitting in the foot well in front of where the passenger seat use to sit. They are charged by the alternator as i drive down the road...not much more caustic the boiling battery acid.....and i breath the air in the van every day only have minor hazmat stuff in here a few times a yr, not worth any worryin on my part...and those batteries, they have been there in the same place in 2 different vans for almost 6 yrs...and the "max O2" test i took a few yrs back was just fine....
Last edited:
It became uncomfortable since I had two barrels of some corrosive stuff in my van. I must mention that the barrels weren't placed on pallets, but directly into my van. All the way from Detroit to KC.
Monty
Expert Expediter
I haul hazmat quite often ... mostly paint. I have even hauled "totes" in the vehicle, which requires a tanker endorsement, which I have.
I do have a bulkhead, Landstar demands it if you are to haul hazmat. And .. Landstar also requires you to have the hazmat endorsement, even if you refuse to haul it. Cockeyed company!
I do have a bulkhead, Landstar demands it if you are to haul hazmat. And .. Landstar also requires you to have the hazmat endorsement, even if you refuse to haul it. Cockeyed company!
Cockeyed is also Panther. They will not put any HAZMAT on a van or Sprinter, mainly because of the fact that most van drivers don't have a clue about logging while placarded. But you know the stuff from Table 2? The stuff which doesn't require placarding at 1000 pounds or less? Panther won't put that on a cargo van, either, unless the driver has a HAZMAT endorsement, despite not needing a CDL or HAZMAT endorsement to haul it.
The Landstar bulkhead requirement for HAZMAT is a little odd, though. While it's certainly safer to have a bulkhead than to not have one, anything that is prohibited from being carried in the cab of a truck (most poisons, inhalation hazards, etc.) is also prohibited from being carried in a cargo van, bulkhead or no bulkhead, as the entire van is the cab.
The Landstar bulkhead requirement for HAZMAT is a little odd, though. While it's certainly safer to have a bulkhead than to not have one, anything that is prohibited from being carried in the cab of a truck (most poisons, inhalation hazards, etc.) is also prohibited from being carried in a cargo van, bulkhead or no bulkhead, as the entire van is the cab.
It's been yrs since i ran Canada,so this info may be dated.You cannot take any amount across the Ambas bridge,i mean not one box of paint.I think they have a ferry, but i was always paid to go to the Blue Water and cross there.I have my endorsment and get some paint every once and awhile,no bulkhead,etrack on walls and floor.
You can't take one box of paint across the Ambassador Bridge? What about 55 gallon drums of paint? Or one-gallon or five-gallon containers of paint? You can take those across the bridge. I've done it many times.
I think you mean to say that you cannot take any amount of HAZMAT (Hazardous Material) across the bridge, which is true.
It is also true that if the load does not require placarding, then it's not HAZMAT.
HAZMAT is defined and classified as material determined by the Secretary of Transportation to be hazardous, AND, is listed on the Table of Hazardous Materials, AND, is in a quantity which requires placarding. Must be all three, not one or two of those. All three.
I think you mean to say that you cannot take any amount of HAZMAT (Hazardous Material) across the bridge, which is true.
It is also true that if the load does not require placarding, then it's not HAZMAT.
HAZMAT is defined and classified as material determined by the Secretary of Transportation to be hazardous, AND, is listed on the Table of Hazardous Materials, AND, is in a quantity which requires placarding. Must be all three, not one or two of those. All three.
I think you'll find that it's more than 119 gallons, but also only if the aggregate rated capacity of the tote or totes (Intermediate Bulk Containers, or IBC, usually 275, 330, or 500 gallon capacity) is 1000 gallons or more. So a single tote wouldn't require the tanker endorsement. HAZMAT placarding doesn't factor into the requirement for the tanker endorsement.
The FMCSA changed the regulation last year (goes into effect July 8[SUP]th[/SUP] of this year) in direct response to a petition led by the Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance (CVSA), but despite the petition explicitly noting that individual portable tanks under 1,000 gallons, even if part of an aggregate shipment including more than 1,000 total gallons of capacity, should not trigger the need for a tank endorsement on a commercial driver’s license, the rule was worded to include IBCs.
The new regulation is:
It is overly broad and the FMCSA is revisiting the rule. One of the biggest problems with the current rule is that it also covers empty and residual totes if the aggregate capacity is 1000 gallons or more. The proposed definition changes will exempt the empties, and will possibly exclude totes and other IBCs entirely unless the aggregate amount hauled (instead of aggregate capacity) exceeds 1000 gallons.
But the way it stands at the moment (as of July 8[SUP]th[/SUP]), you don't need a tanker endorsement to haul totes, as long as the total capacity of all of the totes is under 1000 gallons. That's not a problem for most van or Sprinter drivers, but it could be a problem with the bigger trucks.
Monty
Expert Expediter
I agree with you Turtle that the regulation is muddy, and unclear. I also knew they were going to revisit it. However, Landstar did require a tanker endorsement for me to haul 2 empty totes. And the van had to have BOTH hazard class placards on it. Had they been on an open flatbed, the placards on the tote it's self would have been sufficient.
I called FMCSA when I hauled them a few months back and received this as an answer: (paraphrasing) "Tanker endorsement because .... of the surge factor, one untrained in tankers might be surprised when the liquid moved around." Or something to that affect. But the totes paid well! So I took them.
I called FMCSA when I hauled them a few months back and received this as an answer: (paraphrasing) "Tanker endorsement because .... of the surge factor, one untrained in tankers might be surprised when the liquid moved around." Or something to that affect. But the totes paid well! So I took them.
Monty
Expert Expediter
Well, this was timely .. from Landstar's website ....
They also provide this link to the regulation:
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2012-05-24/pdf/2012-12692.pdf
They also provide this link to the regulation:
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2012-05-24/pdf/2012-12692.pdf