TopNews

FMCSA Proposes to Clarify ‘Tank Vehicle’ Definition

September 30, 2013

By Truckinginfo Staff

SHARING TOOLS        | Print Subscribe

The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration is proposing a new definition of a “tank vehicle” to clarify concerns about the impact of the definition on Commercial Drivers License requirements.

Under the proposal, which slightly revises earlier interpretations, a vehicle carrying multiple Intermediate Bulk Containers over 119 gallons each, amounting to 1,000 gallons or more, would be classified as a tanker, requiring a hazmat endorsement on the driver’s license.

The earlier interpretation, which raised concern among industry groups such as American Trucking Associations, was confusing because it implied that the hazmat endorsement was required to operate a tank larger than 119 gallons that is permanently attached to the trailer.

Comments on the proposed rule are due by November 25.

 

 

 

Comments

  1. 1. Monk [ October 01, 2013 @ 06:29AM ]

    Are we talking hazmat endorsement here or TANK endorsement (which can be combined with a hazmat endorsement as an X endorsement in Ohio)?

  2. 2. dan [ October 01, 2013 @ 09:04AM ]

    Does this mean that you have to have haz mat to haul anything in a tank

  3. 3. Nick [ October 01, 2013 @ 03:50PM ]

    Got this one wrong folks. It may need a tank endorsement, but has nothing to do with Haz Mat.

  4. 4. John [ October 01, 2013 @ 08:23PM ]

    Come on, give'm a break! FMCSA makes a bunch of statements (rules) that they don't have a clue what they're saying is. The article started out about the tank endorsement, and they just assumed we'd all be dumb enough to NOT catch them switching the topic to HazMat.

  5. 5. BarbRRB [ October 02, 2013 @ 06:01AM ]

    FMCSA......... you all are "FIRED". Tank endorsement and Hazmat? There are food grade tankers.

  6. 6. Ken [ October 08, 2013 @ 10:48AM ]

    I think the rules have always been quite clear. Anyone who is confused prolly should stay out of the business.

  7. 7. SgtB [ October 09, 2013 @ 09:30AM ]

    The rules may be clear but the above article is not.

  8. 8. Laurie [ November 05, 2013 @ 01:52PM ]

    OK so what definition does a "Water Tanker" fall under cause that certainly ain't hazmat!? Do I still need a tanker endorsement? I would think so because of the "slosh" factor! Does it matter on the gallon size?

  9. 9. Laurie [ November 05, 2013 @ 01:52PM ]

    OK so what definition does a "Water Tanker" fall under cause that certainly ain't hazmat!? Do I still need a tanker endorsement? I would think so because of the "slosh" factor! Does it matter on the gallon size?

  10. 10. Laurie [ November 05, 2013 @ 01:52PM ]

    OK so what definition does a "Water Tanker" fall under cause that certainly ain't hazmat!? Do I still need a tanker endorsement? I would think so because of the "slosh" factor! Does it matter on the gallon size?

  11. 11. Laurie [ November 05, 2013 @ 01:52PM ]

    OK so what definition does a "Water Tanker" fall under cause that certainly ain't hazmat!? Do I still need a tanker endorsement? I would think so because of the "slosh" factor! Does it matter on the gallon size?

 

Comment On This Story

Name:  
Email:  
Comment: (Maximum 2000 characters)  
Leave this field empty:
* Please note that every comment is moderated.

Newsletter

We offer e-newsletters that deliver targeted news and information for the entire fleet industry.

GotQuestions?

LUBRICANTS

The expert, Mark Betner from Citgo will answer your questions
Ask a question

Sponsored by


WHEEL ENDS SOLUTIONS

Wheel end expert Jeff Geist from STEMCO will answer your questions
Ask a question

Sponsored by

Magazine