[Federal Register: September 8, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 173)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 52844-52856]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr08se03-10]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Research and Special Programs Administration
49 CFR Parts 105, 107 and 171
[Docket No. RSPA-03-15372 (RSP-5)]
RIN 2137-AD71
Hazardous Materials Regulations: Penalty Guidelines and Other
Procedural Regulations
AGENCY: Research and Special Programs Administration (RSPA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this final rule, we (RSPA) are increasing to $32,500 and
$275, respectively, the maximum and minimum civil penalties for a
knowing violation of Federal hazardous materials transportation law or
a regulation issued under that law. We are publishing revised baseline
assessments for frequently cited violations to provide the regulated
community and the general public with more current information on
RSPA's hazardous material penalty assessment process. The revisions to
RSPA's baseline penalty assessments consider the increase in the
maximum civil penalty to $32,500. We are also advising the public that,
in proposing or assessing a civil penalty, we will not normally
consider a prior violation in a case that was initiated in a calendar
year more than six years prior to the year in which the current
proceeding is initiated.
In addition, we are updating the address to which civil penalty
payments must be sent, and we are making editorial changes to our
procedural regulations for issuing an administrative determination of
preemption.
EFFECTIVE DATE: This rule is effective on September 30, 2003.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John J. O'Connell, Jr., Office of
Hazardous Materials Enforcement, (202) 366-4700; or Frazer C. Hilder,
Office of the Chief Counsel, (202) 366-4400, Research and Special
Programs Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh
Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Increase in Maximum and Minimum Civil Penalties
The Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 1990 (the
Act) as amended by the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996 (Pub. L.
104-134) requires each Federal agency to periodically adjust civil
penalties it administers to consider the effects of inflation. (The Act
is set forth in the note to 28 U.S.C. 2461.) According to Section 5 of
the Act, a maximum civil penalty (or the range of minimum and maximum
civil penalties) must be increased based on a ``cost-of-living
adjustment'' determined by the increase in the Consumer Price Index
(CPI-U) for the month of June of the calendar year preceding the
adjustment as compared to the CPI-U for the month of June of the
calendar year in which the last adjustment was made. The Act also
specifies that the amount of the adjustment must be rounded to the
nearest multiple of $5,000, for a penalty between $10,000 and $100,000,
and that the first adjustment to a civil penalty is limited to 10%. Any
increased civil penalty amount applies only to violations that occur
after the date the increase takes effect.
In a final rule published in the Federal Register on January 21,
1997, RSPA increased the maximum civil penalty from $25,000 to $27,500
for a knowing violation of the Federal hazardous material
transportation law, 49 U.S.C. 5101 et seq., or RSPA's regulations in
subchapters A and C of 49 CFR, Chapter I. 62 FR 2970. Accordingly, we
are now increasing the maximum civil penalty by $5,000, to $32,500,
based on the increase in the CPI-U from June 1997 (160.3) to June 2002
(179.9), or 12.2%, times $27,500 equals $3,355, which must be rounded
to $5,000. We have not previously adjusted the $250 minimum penalty
amount specified in 49 U.S.C. 5123(a)(1), so we are increasing the
minimum civil penalty by $25, to $275, because of the 10% limitation
for the first adjustment.
To implement these adjustments, we are amending 49 CFR 107.329 and
171.1(c) to specify that the higher maximum and minimum civil penalties
will apply to a violation of the Federal hazardous materials
transportation law, a regulation or order issued under that law, or an
exemption issued under subpart B of 49 CFR Part 107 that occurs after
September 30, 2003. We are also making a similar change to the
reference to the maximum penalty in Section IV.C. of Appendix A to Part
107, subpart D.
II. Revisions to Civil Penalty Guidelines
RSPA's hazardous material transportation enforcement civil penalty
guidelines are published in Appendix A to 49 CFR Part 107, subpart D.
These guidelines were first published in the Federal Register on March
6, 1995, in response to a request contained in Senate Report 03-150
that accompanied the Department of Transportation and
[[Page 52845]]
Related Agencies Appropriations Act of 1994. See the final rule in
Docket No. HM-207D, 60 FR 12139. Revisions to these guidelines have
been published on January 21, 1997, and August 28, 2001, in the final
rules in Docket Nos. HM-207F, 62 FR 2970, and HM-189S, 66 FR 45177,
respectively. Publication of these guidelines provides the regulated
community and the general public with information concerning the manner
in which RSPA generally begins its hazmat penalty assessment process
and the information that respondents in enforcement cases should
provide to justify reduction of proposed penalties.
These guidelines, which are periodically updated, are used by
RSPA's enforcement personnel and attorneys as a means of determining a
proposed civil penalty for violations of Federal hazardous material
transportation law and the regulations issued under that law. As a
general statement of agency policy and practice, these guidelines are
not finally determinative of any issues or rights, and do not have the
force of law. They are informational, impose no requirements, and
constitute a statement of agency policy for which no notice of proposed
rulemaking is necessary. See also the discussion of the nature and
RSPA's use of these penalty guidelines in the preamble to the final
rules published on March 6, 1995, 60 FR 12139-40, and January 21, 1997,
62 FR 2970-71.
These penalty guidelines remain subject to revision, and, in any
particular case, RSPA's Office of Hazardous Materials Enforcement
(OHME) and Office of the Chief Counsel will use the version of the
guidelines in effect at the time a matter is referred by OHME for
possible issuance of a notice of probable violation. Questions
concerning RSPA's penalty guidelines and any comments or suggested
revisions may be addressed to the persons identified above, in FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
A. Baseline Penalty Amounts
This final rule publishes the latest revisions that RSPA has made
to the List of Frequently Cited Violations and their baseline
assessments. These revisions to Part II of the guidelines are the
result of revisions to the requirements in RSPA's regulations and our
overall review of the penalty guidelines during the past two years.
These revisions consider the increase in the maximum civil penalty to
$32,500, in accordance with the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation
Adjustment Act of 1990, as amended by the Debt Collection Improvement
Act of 1996, as discussed above.
In the List of Frequently Cited Violations, we list the section
number(s) of 49 CFR for each violation, except the word ``Various'' is
used when a generally stated violation may be covered by more than one
section of the regulations (e.g., the testing requirements applicable
to the manufacture of each different DOT specification cylinder are
contained in different sections of 49 CFR Part 178). In those instances
where the baseline assessment is stated as a range (e.g., $5,000 to
$10,000), the factors generally considered in determining an amount
within that range are indicated within the description of the violation
(e.g., the length of time that a continuing violation has lasted).
Otherwise, we generally apply the top, middle, or bottom of the range
depending on the Packing Group of the hazardous material involved in a
violation, or we use the middle of the range for the ``normal'' type of
violation.
RSPA created and uses these penalty guidelines to promote
consistency and provide a standard for imposing similar penalties in
similar cases. When a violation not described in the guidelines is
encountered, RSPA often determines a baseline assessment by analogy to
a similar violation in the guidelines. However, as emphasized in Parts
III and IV of the guidelines, the baseline assessments are only the
starting point for assessing a penalty for a violation. Because no two
cases are identical, rigid use of the guidelines would produce
arbitrary results and, most significantly, would ignore the statutory
mandate to consider several specific assessment criteria set forth in
49 U.S.C. 5123 and 49 CFR 107.331. Therefore, regardless of whether or
not the guidelines are used to determine a baseline amount for a
violation, RSPA enforcement and legal personnel must apply the
statutory assessment criteria to all relevant information in the record
concerning any alleged violation and the apparent violator.
Consideration of these criteria often warrants a final penalty that is
lower or higher than the initial baseline assessment.
B. Increasing Penalties for Prior Violations
Section 5123(c) of 49 U.S.C. provides that ``any history of prior
violations'' must be considered in determining the amount of a civil
penalty for a violation of Federal hazardous material transportation
law or a regulation or order issued under that law. As set forth in
Section IV.E of the penalty guidelines, our general standard is to
increase the baseline penalty for a violation by 25% for each prior
case, up to a maximum increase of 100%. We are revising this section of
the guidelines to clarify that we apply an increase of 10% for each
prior ticket against the same company or individual.
Until this year, RSPA has generally limited to five years the time
that it will ``look back'' for prior violations, although we recognize
that there may be circumstances in which it would be appropriate to
``look back'' for a longer period of time. We have measured the five
year period according to the calendar years in which the prior case and
the new case are initiated. For example, the violations in a prior case
initiated any time during 1997 or later were generally considered as an
aggravating factor in a new case in which a Notice of Probable
Violation was issued at any time during 2002.
We are revising Section IV.E. of the penalty guidelines to advise
the public that, starting in 2003, RSPA will ``look back'' six years
(rather than five) for prior violations from the calendar year in which
the new case is initiated. Thus, as a general rule, we will disregard
prior violations in any civil or criminal hazardous materials
enforcement case (or ticket) that was initiated in a calendar year more
than six years before the year in which the case is initiated. For
example, in any case in which RSPA issues a Notice of Probable
Violation during 2003, we will normally consider prior violations in
cases and tickets with a number beginning in ``97'' or later in
proposing and assessing a civil penalty for the new violations; in the
absence of unusual circumstances, we would not consider prior
violations in cases initiated in 1996 or earlier in proposing and
assessing a civil penalty for violations in a case initiated during
2003.
III. Editorial Revisions
A. Preemption
In the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (the Act) (Pub. L. 107-296),
Congress has made it clear that security is a part of the safe
transportation of hazardous materials in commerce. Section 1711 of the
Act amended the preemption provisions in 49 U.S.C. 5125(a) and (b) to
specify that the Federal hazardous material transportation law preempts
non-Federal requirements that conflict with Federal hazardous material
transportation law, a regulation issued under that law, ``or a
hazardous material transportation security regulation or directive
issued by the Secretary of Homeland Security.'' RSPA is revising its
procedural regulations in subpart C of 49 CFR Part 107 accordingly. In
other sections, RSPA is removing references
[[Page 52846]]
to a non-Federal requirement being preempted ``under * * * regulations
issued'' under the Federal hazardous material transportation law to
clarify that, while a non-Federal requirement that conflicts with
RSPA's regulations is preempted under the preemption criteria in 49
U.S.C. 5125, it is preempted by that Federal law and not by the
regulations issued pursuant to that law.
RSPA is also revising the definition of ``Regulations issued under
Federal hazardous material transportation law'' in 49 CFR 105.5 (and
removing and reserving Sec. 107.201(c)) to explain that, in addition
to Subchapters A and C of Title 49, regulations issued by the Federal
Motor Carrier Safety Administration and the Transportation Security
Administration in Title 49 and regulations issued by the United States
Coast Guard in Title 46 are also issued under Federal hazardous
material transportation law. In addition, RSPA is providing a facsimile
number and an email address (in addition to a mail address) for
submission of an application for a preemption determination or for a
waiver of preemption).
B. Enforcement
Section 107.315 of 49 CFR contains the address of the Financial
Operations Division of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) which
processes the payment of civil penalties in RSPA's enforcement cases.
This rule updates the FAA office code and Post Office box number listed
in paragraphs (b) and (c) of that section.
Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
A. Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures
This final rule is not considered a significant regulatory action
under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 and, therefore, was not
reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget. This rule is not
significant under the Regulatory Policies and Procedures of the
Department of Transportation (44 FR 11034). The economic impact of this
final rule is minimal to the extent that preparation of a regulatory
evaluation is not warranted.
B. Executive Order 13132
This final rule has been analyzed in accordance with the principles
and criteria contained in Executive Order 13132 (``Federalism'').
Because this final rule carries out a statutory mandate without
interpretation, revises an informational appendix without imposing any
requirements, and makes editorial changes, preparation of a federalism
assessment is not warranted.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
I certify that this final rule will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. This rule applies to
shippers and carriers of hazardous materials, some of which are small
entities; however, there is no economic impact on any person who
complies with Federal hazardous materials law and the regulations and
orders issued under that law.
D. Paperwork Reduction Act
There are no new information requirements in this final rule.
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
This final rule does not impose unfunded mandates under the
Unfunded Mandates Act of 1995. It does not result in annual costs of
$100 million or more, in the aggregate, to any of the following: State,
local, or Indian tribal governments, or the private sector, and is the
least burdensome alternative to achieve the objective of the rule.
F. Environmental Assessment
There are no significant environmental impacts associated with this
final rule.
G. Regulation Identifier Number (RIN)
A regulation identifier number (RIN) is assigned to each regulatory
action listed in the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulations. The
Regulatory Information Service Center publishes the Unified Agenda in
spring and fall of each year. The RIN contained in the heading of this
document can be used to cross-reference this action with the Unified
Agenda.
List of Subjects
49 CFR Part 105
Administrative practice and procedure, Hazardous materials
transportation.
49 CFR Part 107
Administrative practices and procedure, Hazardous materials
transportation, Packaging and containers, Penalties, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
49 CFR Part 171
Exports, Hazardous materials transportation, Hazardous Waste,
Imports, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
0
In consideration of the foregoing, 49 CFR chapter I is amended as
follows:
PART 105--HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAM DEFINITIONS AND GENERAL
PROCEDURES
0
1. The authority citation for part 105 continues to read:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101-5127; 49 CFR 1.53.
0
2. In Sec. 105.5(b), revise the definition of ``Regulations issued
under Federal hazardous materials transportation law'' to read as
follows:
Sec. 105.5 Definitions.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
Regulations issued under Federal hazardous material transportation
law include this subchapter A (parts 105-110) and subchapter C (parts
171-180) of this chapter, certain regulations in chapter I (United
States Coast Guard) of title 46, Code of Federal Regulations, and in
chapters III (Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration) and XII
(Transportation Security Administration) of subtitle B of this title,
as indicated by the authority citations therein.
* * * * *
PART 107--HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PROGRAM PROCEDURES
0
3. The authority citation for part 107 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101-5127, 44701; Pub. L. 101-410 section 4
(28 U.S.C. 2461 note); Pub. L. 104-121 sections 212-213; Pub. L.
104-134 section 31001; 49 CFR 1.45, 1.53.
0
4. In Sec. 107.201, revise paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2), and remove
and reserve paragraph (c) to read as follows:
Sec. 107.201 Purpose and scope.
(a) * * *
(1) Any person, including a State, political subdivision, or Indian
tribe, directly affected by a requirement of a State, political
subdivision, or Indian tribe, may apply for a determination as to
whether that requirement is preempted under 49 U.S.C. 5125.
(2) A State, political subdivision, or Indian tribe may apply for a
waiver of preemption with respect to any requirement that the State,
political subdivision, or Indian tribe acknowledges to be preempted by
49 U.S.C. 5125, or that has been determined by a court of competent
jurisdiction to be so preempted.
* * * * *
(c) [Reserved]
* * * * *
[[Page 52847]]
0
5. In Sec. 107.202, revise paragraphs (a) introductory text, (b)(1),
and (b)(2) to read as follows:
Sec. 107.202 Standards for determining preemption.
(a) Except as provided in Sec. 107.221 and unless otherwise
authorized by Federal law, any requirement of a State or political
subdivision thereof or an Indian tribe that concerns one of the
following subjects and that is not substantively the same as any
provision of the Federal hazardous materials transportation law, a
regulation issued under the Federal hazardous material transportation
law, or a hazardous material transportation security regulation or
directive issued by the Secretary of Homeland Security that concerns
that subject, is preempted:
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) It is not possible to comply with a requirement of the State,
political subdivision, or Indian tribe and a requirement under the
Federal hazardous material transportation law, a regulation issued
under the Federal hazardous material transportation law, or a hazardous
material transportation security regulation or directive issued by the
Secretary of Homeland Security;
(2) The requirement of the State, political subdivision, or Indian
tribe, as applied or enforced, is an obstacle to accomplishing and
carrying out the Federal hazardous material transportation law, a
regulation issued under the Federal hazardous material transportation
law, or a hazardous material transportation security regulation or
directive issued by the Secretary of Homeland Security.
* * * * *
0
6. In Sec. 107.203, revise paragraphs (b)(1), (b)(3), and (c) to read
as follows:
Sec. 107.203 Application.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) Be submitted to the Associate Administrator:
(i) By mail addressed to the Associate Administrator for Hazardous
Materials Safety (Attn: Hazardous Materials Preemption Docket),
Research and Special Programs Administration, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590-0001;
(ii) By fax to the Associate Administrator for Hazardous Materials
Safety (Attn: Hazardous Materials Preemption Docket), at 202-366-5713;
or
(iii) Electronically to the Associate Administrator for Hazardous
Materials Safety (Attn: Hazardous Materials Preemption Docket), at
aahms-preemption@rspa.dot.gov.* * * * *
(3) Specify each requirement of the Federal hazardous materials
transportation law, regulations issued under the Federal hazardous
material transportation law, or hazardous material transportation
security regulations or directives issued by the Secretary of Homeland
Security with which the applicant seeks the State or political
subdivision or Indian tribe requirement to be compared;
* * * * *
(c) The filing of an application for a determination under this
section does not constitute grounds for noncompliance with any
requirement of the Federal hazardous materials transportation law,
regulations issued under the Federal hazardous material transportation
law, or hazardous material transportation security regulations or
directives issued by the Secretary of Homeland Security.
* * * * *
0
7. In Sec. 107.209, revise paragraph (d) to read as follows:
Sec. 107.209 Determination.
* * * * *
(d) A determination issued under this section constitutes an
administrative determination as to whether a particular requirement of
a State or political subdivision or Indian tribe is preempted under the
Federal hazardous materials transportation law. The fact that a
determination has not been issued under this section with respect to a
particular requirement of a State or political subdivision or Indian
tribe carries no implication as to whether the requirement is preempted
under the Federal hazardous materials transportation law.
0
8. In Sec. 107.215, revise the first sentence in paragraph (a), and
paragraphs (b)(1), (b)(4), and (b)(5) to read as follows:
Sec. 107.215 Application.
(a) With the exception of requirements preempted under 49 U.S.C.
5125(c), any State or political subdivision thereof, or Indian tribe
may apply to the Associate Administrator for a waiver of preemption
with respect to any requirement that the State or political subdivision
thereof or an Indian tribe acknowledges to be preempted under the
Federal hazardous materials transportation law, or that has been
determined by a court of competent jurisdiction to be so preempted. * *
*
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) Be submitted to the Associate Administrator:
(i) By mail addressed to the Associate Administrator for Hazardous
Materials Safety (Attn: Hazardous Materials Preemption Docket),
Research and Special Programs Administration, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590-0001;
(ii) By fax to the Associate Administrator for Hazardous Materials
Safety (Attn: Hazardous Materials Preemption Docket), at 202-366-5713;
or
(iii) Electronically to the Associate Administrator for Hazardous
Materials Safety (Attn: Hazardous Materials Preemption Docket), at
aahms-preemption@rspa.dot.gov.* * * * *
(4) Contain an express acknowledgment by the applicant that the
State, political subdivision, or Indian tribe requirement is preempted
under Federal hazardous materials transportation law, unless it has
been so determined by a court of competent jurisdiction or in a
determination issued under Sec. 107.209;
(5) Specify each requirement of the Federal hazardous materials
transportation law that preempts the State, political subdivision, or
Indian tribe requirement;
* * * * *
0
9. In Sec. 107.219, revise paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) to read as
follows:
Sec. 107.219 Processing.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(1) The applicant State or political subdivision thereof or Indian
tribe expressly acknowledges in its application that the State or
political subdivision or Indian tribe requirement for which the
determination is sought is inconsistent with the requirements of the
Federal hazardous materials transportation law, regulations issued
under the Federal hazardous material transportation law, or hazardous
material transportation security regulations or directives issued by
the Secretary of Homeland Security.
(2) The State or political subdivision thereof or Indian tribe
requirement has been determined by a court of competent jurisdiction or
in a ruling issued under Sec. 107.209 to be inconsistent with the
requirements of the Federal hazardous materials transportation law,
regulations issued under the Federal hazardous material transportation
law, or hazardous material transportation security
[[Page 52848]]
regulations or directives issued by the Secretary of Homeland Security.
* * * * *
0
10. In Sec. 107.221, revise paragraph (e) to read as follows:
Sec. 107.221 Determination.
* * * * *
(e) A determination under this section constitutes an
administrative finding of whether a particular requirement of a State
or political subdivision thereof or Indian tribe is preempted under the
Federal hazardous materials transportation law, or whether preemption
is waived.
Sec. 107.315 [Amended]
0
11. In Sec. 107.315, in paragraphs (c) and (d), the words ``Financial
Operations Division (AMZ-320), Federal Aviation Administration, Mike
Monroney Aeronautical Center, P.O. Box 25880, Oklahoma City, OK 73125''
are revised to read: ``Financial Operations Division (AMZ-120), Federal
Aviation Administration, Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center, P.O. Box
25082, Oklahoma City, OK 73125''.
Sec. 107.329 [Amended]
0
12. In Sec. 107.329, in paragraphs (a) and (b), the words ``$25,000
($27,500 for a violation occurring after January 21, 1997) and not less
than $250 for each violation.'' are revised to read: ``$32,500 and not
less than $275 for each violation. (For a violation that occurred after
January 21, 1997, and before October 1, 2003, the maximum and minimum
civil penalties are $27,500 and $250, respectively.)''
Subpart D, Appendix A [Amended]
0
13. In part I of appendix A to subpart D of part 107, the parenthetical
phrase ``(as of January 18, 1997)'' is revised to read: ``(as of
October 1, 2003)''.
0
14. Appendix A to subpart D of part 107 is amended by revising the List
of Frequently Cited Violations (Part II) to read as follows:
II.--List of Frequently Cited Violations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Violation description Section or cite Baseline assessment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
General Requirements
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Registration requirements:
Failure to register as an offeror or 107.608, 107.612................. $1,000 + $500 each additional
carrier of hazardous material and pay year.
registration fee.
B. Training requirements:
1. Failure to provide initial training 172.702..........................
to hazmat employees (general
awareness, function-specific, safety,
and security awareness training):.
a. more than 10 hazmat employees... ................................. $700 and up each area.
b. 10 hazmat employees or fewer.... ................................. $400 and up each area.
2. Failure to provide recurrent 172.702..........................
training to hazmat employees (general
awareness, function-specific, safety,
and security awareness training).
a. more than 10 hazmat employees... ................................. $400 and up each area.
b. 10 hazmat employees or fewer.... ................................. $250 and up each area.
3. Failure to provide in depth security 172.702..........................
training (when a security plan is
required).
a. no security plan developed...... ................................. included in penalty for no
security plan $2,500.
b. security plan developed but
employee not trained.
4. Failure to create and maintain 172.704..........................
training records.
a. more than 10 hazmat employees... ................................. $800 and up.
b. 10 hazmat employees or fewer.... ................................. $500 and up.
C. Security plans:
1. Failure to develop a security plan; 172.800..........................
failure to adhere to security plan.
a. No security plan at all; no ................................. $6,000 and up.
adherence.
b. Incomplete security plan or ................................. $2,000 and up for each element.
incomplete adherence (one or more
of three required elements
missing).
2. Failure to update a security plan to 172.802(b)....................... $2,000 and up.
reflect changing circumstances.
3. Failure to put security plan in 172.800(b)....................... $2,000 and up.
writing; failure to make all copies
identical.
D. Notification to a foreign shipper:
Failure to provide information of HMR 171.12(a)........................ $1,500 to $7,500 (corresponding
requirements applicable to a shipment to violations by foreign
of hazardous materials within the offeror or forwarding agent).
United States, to a foreign offeror or
forwarding agent at the place of entry
into the U.S.
E. Expired Exemption:
Offering or transporting a hazardous 171.2(a), (b), (c), Various...... $1,000 + $500 each additional
material, or otherwise performing a year.
function covered by an exemption,
after expiration of the exemption.
--------------------------------------------
Offeror Requirements--All hazardous materials
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Undeclared Shipment:
Offering for transportation a hazardous 172.200, 172.300, 172.400, $15,000 and up.
material without shipping papers, 172.500.
package markings, labels, or placards.
B. Shipping Papers:
[[Page 52849]]
1. Failure to provide a shipping paper 172.201.......................... $3,000 to $6,000.
for a shipment of hazardous materials.
2. Failure to follow one or more of the 172.201(a)(1).................... $1,200.
three approved formats for listing
hazardous materials on a shipping
paper.
3. Failure to retain shipping papers 172.201(e)....................... $1,000.
for 375 days after a hazardous
material (or 3 years for a hazardous
waste) is accepted by the initial
carrier.
4. Failure to include a proper shipping 172.202.......................... $800 to $1,600.
name in the shipping description or
using an incorrect proper shipping
name.
5. Failure to include a hazard class/ 172.202.......................... $1,000 to $2,000.
division number in the shipping
description.
6. Failure to include an identification 172.202.......................... $1,000 to $2,000.
number in the shipping description.
7. Using an incorrect hazard class/ 172.202..........................
identification number:.
a. that does not affect ................................. $800.
compatibility requirements.
b. that affects compatibility ................................. $3,000 to $6,000.
requirements.
8. Using an incorrect identification 172.202..........................
number:.
a. that does not change the ................................. $800.
response information.
b. that changes the response ................................. $3,000 to $6,000.
information.
9. Failure to include the Packing 172.202.......................... $1,200.
Group, or using an incorrect Packing
Group.
10. Using a shipping description that 172.202.......................... $800.
includes additional unauthorized
information (extra or incorrect words).
11. Using a shipping description not in 172.202.......................... $500.
required sequence.
12. Using a shipping description with 172.202..........................
two or more required elements missing
or incorrect:.
a. such that the material is ................................. $3,000.
misdescribed.
b. such that the material is ................................. $6,000.
misclassified.
13. Failure to include the total 172.202(c)....................... $500.
quantity of hazardous material covered
by a shipping description.
14. Failure to list an exemption number 172.203(a)....................... $800.
in association with the shipping
description.
15. Failure to indicate ``Limited 172.203(b)....................... $500.
Quantity'' or ``Ltd Qty'' following
the basic shipping description of a
material offered for transportation as
a limited quantity.
16. Failure to include ``RQ'' in the 172.203(c)(2).................... $500.
shipping description to identify a
material that is a hazardous substance.
17. Failure to include a required 172.203(k)....................... $1,000.
technical name in parenthesis for a
listed generic or ``n.o.s.'' material.
18. Failure to include the required 172.204.......................... $1,000.
shipper's certification on a shipping
paper.
19. Failure to sign the required 172.204.......................... $800.
shipper's certification on a shipping
paper.
C. Emergency Response Information
Requirements:
1. Providing or listing incorrect 172.602..........................
emergency response information with or
on a shipping paper.
a. No significant difference in ................................. $800.
response.
b. Significant difference in ................................. $3,000 to $6,000.
response.
2. Failure to include an emergency 172.604.......................... $2,600.
response telephone number on a
shipping paper.
3. Failure to have the emergency 172.604.......................... $1,300.
response telephone number monitored
while a hazardous material is in
transportation or listing multiple
telephone numbers (without specifying
the times for each) that are not
monitored 24 hours a day.
4. Listing an unauthorized emergency 172.604.......................... $2,600 to $4,200.
response telephone number on a
shipping paper.
5. Listing an incorrect or non-working 172.604.......................... $1,300.
emergency response telephone number on
a shipping paper.
6. Failure to provide required 172.604.......................... $1,300.
technical information when the listed
emergency response telephone number is
contacted.
D. Package Marking Requirements:
1. Failure to mark the proper shipping 172.301(a)....................... $800 to $1,600.
name on a package or marking an
incorrect shipping name on a package.
2. Failure to mark the identification 172.301(a)....................... $1,000 to $2,000.
number on a package.
[[Page 52850]]
3. Marking a package with an incorrect 172.301(a).......................
identification number.
a. that does not change the ................................. $800.
response information.
b. that changes the response ................................. $3,000 to $6,000.
information.
4. Failure to mark the proper shipping 172.301(a)....................... $3,000 to $6,000.
name and identification number on a
package.
5. Marking a package with an incorrect 172.301(a).......................
shipping name and identification
number.
a. that does not change the ................................. $1,500 to $3,000.
response information.
b. that changes the response ................................. $3,000 to $6,000.
information.
6. Failure to include the required 172.301(c)....................... $1,000.
technical name(s) in parenthesis for a
listed generic or ``n.o.s.'' entry.
7. Marking a package as containing 172.303(a)....................... $800.
hazardous material when it contains no
hazardous material.
8. Failure to locate required markings 172.303(a)(4).................... $800.
away from other markings that could
reduce their effectiveness.
9. Failure to mark a package containing 172.312.......................... $2,500 to $3,500.
liquid hazardous materials with
required orientation marking.
10. Failure to mark ``RQ'' on a non- 172.324(b)....................... $500.
bulk package containing a hazardous
substance.
E. Package Labeling Requirements:
1. Failure to label a package.......... 172.400.......................... $5,000.
2. Placing a label that represents a 172.400.......................... $5,000.
hazard other than the hazard presented
by the hazardous material in the
package.
3. Placing a label on a package that 172.401(a)....................... $800.
does not contain a hazardous material.
4. Failure to place a required 172.402.......................... $500 to $2,500.
subsidiary label on a package.
5. Placing a label on a different 172.406(a)....................... $800.
surface of the package than, or away
from, the proper shipping name.
6. Placing an improper size label on a 172.407(c)....................... $800.
package.
7. Placing a label on a package that 172.407(d)....................... $600 to $2,500.
does not meet color specification
requirements (depending on the
variance).
8. Failure to provide an appropriate 172.411.......................... $2,500.
class or division number on a label.
F. Placarding Requirements:
Failure to properly placard a freight 172.504..........................
container or vehicle containing
hazardous materials:.
a. when Table 1 is applicable...... ................................. $1,000 to $9,000.
b. when Table 2 is applicable...... ................................. $800 to $7,200.
G. Packaging Requirements:
1. Offering a hazardous material for Various..........................
transportation in an unauthorized non-
UN standard or nonspecification
packaging (includes failure to comply
with the terms of an exemption
authorizing use of a nonstandard or
nonspecification packaging).
a. Packing Group I (and Sec. ................................. $9,000.
172.504 Table I materials).
b. Packing Group II................ ................................. $7,000.
c. Packing Group III............... ................................. $5,000.
2. Offering a hazardous material for 178.601 & Various................
transportation in a self-certified
packaging that has not been subjected
to design qualification testing:.
a. Packing Group I (and Sec. ................................. $10,800.
172.504 Table I materials).
b. Packing Group II................ ................................. $8,400.
c. Packing Group III............... ................................. $6,000.
3. Offering a hazardous material for 178.503(a)....................... $3,600.
transportation in a packaging that has
been successfully tested to an
applicable UN standard but is not
marked with the required UN marking.
4. Failure to close a UN standard 173.22(a)(4)..................... $2,500.
packaging in accordance with the
closure instructions.
5. Offering a hazardous material for 173.24(b)........................
transportation in a packaging that
leaks during conditions normally
incident to transportation:
a. Packing Group I (and Sec. ................................. $12,000.
172.504 Table I materials).
b. Packing Group II................ ................................. $9,000.
c. Packing Group III............... ................................. $6,000.
[[Page 52851]]
6. Overfilling or underfilling a 173.24(b)........................
package so that the effectiveness is
substantially reduced:
a. Packing Group I (and Sec. ................................. $9,000.
172.504 Table I materials).
b. Packing Group II................ ................................. $6,000.
c. Packing Group III............... ................................. $3,000.
7. Offering a hazardous material for 171.14...........................
transportation after October 1, 1996,
in a unauthorized non-UN standard
packaging marked as manufactured to a
DOT specification:
a. packaging meets DOT ................................. $3,000.
specification.
b. packaging does not meet DOT ................................. $5,000 to $9,000.
specification.
8. Failure to mark an overpack with a 173.25(a)(4)..................... $3,000.
statement that the inside packages
comply with prescribed specifications
or standards when specification or
standard packaging is required.
9. Filling an IBC or a portable tank 173.32(a), 180.352, 180.605......
(DOT, UN, or IM) that is out of test
and offering hazardous materials for
transportation in that IBC or portable
tank.
a. All testing overdue............. ................................. $3,500 to $7,000.
b. Only periodic (5 year) test ................................. $3,500.
overdue.
c. Only intermediate periodic (2.5 ................................. $3,500.
year) tests overdue.
10. Failure to provide the required 173.32(f)(6)..................... $6,000 to $12,000.
outage in a portable tank that results
in a release of hazardous materials.
--------------------------------------------
Offeror Requirements--Specific hazardous materials
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Cigarette Lighters:
Offering for transportation an 173.21(i)........................ $7,500.
unapproved cigarette lighter, lighter
refill, or similar device, equipped
with an ignition element and
containing fuel.
B. Class 1--Explosives:
1. Failure to mark the package with the 172.320.......................... $1,200.
EX number for each substance contained
in the package or, alternatively,
indicate the EX number for each
substance in association with the
description on the shipping
description.
2. Offering an unapproved explosive for ................................. 173.54,
transportation:
a. Div. 1.3 and 1.4 fireworks 173.56(b)........................ $5,000 to $10,000.
meeting the chemistry requirements
(quantity and type) of APA
Standard 87-1.
b. All other explosives (including ................................. $10,000 and up.
forbidden).
3. Offering a leaking or damaged 173.54(c)........................ $10,000 and up.
package of explosives for
transportation.
4. Packaging explosives in the same 173.61........................... $2,500 to $5,000.
outer packaging with other materials.
C. Class 7--Radioactive Materials:
1. Failure to include required 172.203(d)....................... $1,000 to $3,000.
additional entries, or providing
incorrect information for these
additional entries.
2. Failure to mark the gross mass on 172.310(a)....................... $800.
the outside of a package of Class 7
material that exceeds 110 pounds.
3. Failure to mark each package in 172.310(b)....................... $800.
letters at least 13 mm (\1/2\ inch)
high with the words ``Type A'' or
``Type B'' as appropriate.
4. Placing a label on Class 7 material 172.403.......................... $5,000.
that understates the proper label
category.
5. Placing a label on Class 7 material 172.403(g)....................... $2,000 to $4,000.
that fails to contain (or has
erroneous) entries for the name of the
radionuclide(s), activity, and
transport index.
6. Failure to meet one or more of the 173.410.......................... $5,000.
general design requirements for a
package used to ship a Class 7
material.
7. Failure to comply with the 173.411.......................... $5,000.
industrial packaging (IP) requirements
when offering a Class 7 material for
transportation.
8. Failure to provide a tamper- 173.412(a)....................... $2,000.
indicating device on a Type A package
used to ship a Class 7 material.
9. Failure to meet the additional 173.412(b)-(i)................... $5,000.
design requirements of a Type A
package used to ship a Class 7
material.
[[Page 52852]]
10. Failure to meet the performance 173.412(j)-(l)................... $8,400.
requirements for a Type A package used
to ship a Class 7 material..
11. Offering a DOT specification 7A 173.415(a), 173.461 ................................
packaging without maintaining complete
documentation of tests and an
engineering evaluation or comparative
data:
a. Tests and evaluation not ................................. $8,400.
performed.
b. Complete records not maintained. ................................. $2,000 to $5,000.
12. Offering any Type B, Type B(U), 173.416.......................... $9,000.
Type B(M) packaging that failed to
meet the approved DOT, NRC or DOE
design, as applicable.
13. Offering a Type B packaging without 173.471(a). ................................
holding a valid NRC approval
certificate:
a. Never having obtained one....... ................................. $3,000.
b. Holding an expired certificate.. ................................. $1,000.
14. Failure to meet one or more of the 173.420.......................... $10,800.
special requirements for a package
used to ship uranium hexafluoride.
15. Offering Class 7 material for 173.421(a)....................... $4,000.
transportation as a limited quantity
without meeting the requirements for
limited quantity.
16. Offering a multiple-hazard limited 173.423(a)....................... $500 to $2,500.
quantity Class 7 material without
addressing the additional hazard.
17. Offering Class 7 low specific 173.427(a)(1).................... $6,000.
activity (LSA) materials or surface
contaminated objects (SCO) with an
external dose rate that exceeds an
external radiation level of 1 rem/hr
at 3 meters from the unshielded
material.
18. Offering Class 7 LSA materials or 173.427(a)(6).................... $1,000.
SCO as exclusive use without providing
specific instructions to the carrier
for maintenance of exclusive use
shipment controls.
19. Offering in excess of Type A 173.431.......................... $12,000.
quantity of a Class 7 material in a
Type A packaging.
20. Offering a package that exceeds the 173.441.......................... $10,000 and up.
permitted limits for surface radiation
or transport index.
21. Offering a package without 173.443.......................... $5,000 and up.
determining the level of removable
external contamination, or that
exceeds the limit for removable
external contamination.
22. Storing packages of radioactive 173.447(a)....................... $5,000 and up.
material in a group with a total
transport index more than 50.
23. Offering for transportation or 173.448(e)....................... $5,000 and up.
transporting aboard a passenger
aircraft any single package or
overpack of Class 7 material with a
transport index greater than 3.0.
24. Exporting a Type B, Type B(U), Type 173.471(d)....................... $3,000.
B(M), or fissile package without
obtaining a U.S. Competent Authority
Certificate or, after obtaining a U.S.
Competent Authority Certificate,
failing to submit a copy to the
national competent authority of each
country into or through which the
package is transported.
25. Offering special form radioactive 173.476(a), (b).................. $2,500.
materials without maintaining a
complete safety analysis or
Certificate of Competent Authority.
D. Class 2--Compressed Gases in Cylinders: ................................
1. Filling and offering a cylinder with 173.301(a)(6).................... $4,200 to $10,400.
compressed gas when the cylinder is
out of test.
2. Failure to check each day the 173.303(d)....................... $5,000.
pressure of a cylinder charged with
acetylene that is representative of
that day's compression, after the
cylinder has cooled to a settled
temperature, or failure to keep a
record of this test for 30 days.
3. Offering a limited quantity of a 173.306(a)(3), (h)............... $1,500 to $6,000.
compressed gas in a metal container
for the purpose of propelling a
nonpoisonous material and failure to
heat the cylinder until the pressure
is equivalent to the equilibrium
pressure at 130[deg]F, without
evidence of leakage, distortion, or
other defect.
--------------------------------------------
Manufacturing, Reconditioning, Retesting Requirements
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Third-Party Packaging Certifiers
(General):
[[Page 52853]]
Issuing a certification that directs 171.2(e), 178.2(b), 178.3(a), $500 per item.
the packaging manufacturer to 178.503(a).
improperly mark a packaging (e.g.,
steel drum to be marked UN 4G).
B. Packaging Manufacturers (General):
1. Failure of a manufacturer or 178.2(c)......................... $2,500.
distributor to notify each person to
whom the packaging is transferred of
all the requirements not met at the
time of transfer, including closure
instructions.
2. Failure to insure a packaging 178.601(b).......................
certified as meeting the UN standard
is capable of passing the required
performance testing.
a. Packing Group I (and Sec. ................................. $10,800.
172.504 Table 1 materials).
b. Packing Group II................ ................................. $8,400.
c. Packing Group III............... ................................. $6,000.
3. Certifying a packaging as meeting a 178.601(d).......................
UN standard when design qualification
testing was not performed.
a. Packing Group I (and Sec. ................................. $10,800.
172.504 table 1 materials).
b. Packing Group II................ ................................. $8,400.
c. Packing Group III............... ................................. $6,000.
4. Failure to conduct periodic 178.601(e)....................... $2,000 to $10,800.
retesting on UN standard packaging
(depending on length of time and
Packing Group).
5. Failure to properly conduct testing
for UN standard packaging (e.g.,
testing with less weight than marked
on packaging; drop testing from lesser
height than required; failing to
condition fiberboard boxes before
design test):.
a. Design qualification testing.... 178.601(d)....................... $2,000 to $10,800.
b. Periodic retesting.............. 178.601(e)....................... $500 to $10,800.
6. Marking, or causing the marking of, 178.2(b), 178.3(a), 178.503(a)(8) $7,200.
a packaging with the symbol of a
manufacturer or packaging certifier
other than the company that actually
manufactured or certified the
packaging.
7. Failure to maintain testing records. 178.601(l).......................
a. Design qualification testing.... ................................. $1,000 to $5,000.
b. Periodic retesting.............. ................................. $500 to $2,000.
8. Improper marking of UN certification 178.503.......................... $500 per item.
9. Manufacturing DOT specification 171.14...........................
packaging after October 1, 1994 that
is not marked as meeting a UN
performance standard.
a. If packaging does meet DOT ................................. $3,000.
specification.
b. If packaging does not meet DOT ................................. $6,000 to $10,800.
specification.
C. Drum Manufacturers & Reconditioners:
1. Failure to properly conduct 178.604(b), (d), 173.28(b)(2)(i).
production leakproofness test on a new
or reconditioned drum.
a. Improper testing................ ................................. $2,000.
b. No testing performed............ ................................. $3,000 to $5,000.
2. Marking an incorrect registration 173.28(b)(2)(ii).................
number on a reconditioned drum.
a. Incorrect number................ ................................. $800.
b. Unauthorized use of another ................................. $7,200.
reconditioner's number.
3. Representing, marking, or certifying 173.28(c), (d)................... $6,000 to $10,800.
a drum as a reconditioned UN standard
packaging when the drum does not meet
a UN standard.
4. Representing, marking, or certifying 173.28(d)........................ $500.
a drum as altered from one UN standard
to another, when the drum has not
actually been altered.
D. IBC and Portable Tank Requalification:
1. Failure to properly mark an IBC or 180.352(e), 178.703(b), $500 per item.
portable tank with the most current 180.605(k).
retest and/or inspection information.
2. Failure to keep complete and 180.352(f), 180.605(l)...........
accurate records of IBC or portable
tank retest and reinspection.
a. No records kept................. ................................. $4,000.
b. Incomplete or inaccurate records ................................. $1,000 to $3,000.
3. Failure to make reinspection and 180.352(f), 49 U.S.C. 5121(b)(2). $1,000.
retest records available to a DOT
representative upon request.
E. Cylinder Manufacturers & Rebuilders:
[[Page 52854]]
1. Manufacturing, representing, Various.......................... $7,500 to $15,000.
marking, certifying, or selling a DOT
high-pressure cylinder that was not
inspected and verified by an approved
independent inspection agency.
2. Failure to have a registration Various.......................... $800.
number or failure to mark the
registration number on the cylinder.
3. Marking another company's number on Various.......................... $7,200.
a cylinder.
4. Failure to mark the date of 178.65(i)........................ $3,000.
manufacture or lot number on a DOT-39
cylinder.
5. Failure to have a chemical analysis Various.......................... $5,000.
performed in the U.S. for a material
manufactured outside the U.S./failure
to obtain a chemical analysis from the
foreign manufacturer.
6. Failure to meet wall thickness Various.......................... $7,500 to $15,000.
requirements.
7. Failure to heat treat cylinders Various.......................... $5,000 to $15,000.
prior to testing.
8. Failure to conduct a complete visual Various.......................... $2,500 to $6,200.
internal examination.
9. Failure to conduct a hydrostatic Various.......................... $2,500 to $6,200.
test, or conducting a hydrostatic test
with inaccurate test equipment.
10. Failure to conduct a flattening Various.......................... $7,500 to $15,000.
test.
11. Failure to conduct a burst test on 178.65(f)(2)..................... $5,000 to $15,000.
a DOT-39 cylinder.
12. Failure to have inspections and Various.......................... $7,500 to $15,000.
verifications performed by an
inspector.
13. Failure to maintain required Various..........................
inspector's reports.
a. No reports at all............... ................................. $5,000.
b. Incomplete or inaccurate reports ................................. $1,000 to $4,000.
14. Representing a DOT-4 series 180.211(a)....................... $6,000 to $10,800.
cylinder as repaired or rebuilt to the
requirements of the HMR without being
authorized by the Associate
Administrator.
F. Cylinder Requalification:
1. Failure to remark as DOT 3AL an 173.23(c)........................ $800.
aluminum cylinder manufactured under a
former exemption.
2. Certifying or marking as retested a 180.205(a)....................... $800.
nonspecification cylinder.
3. Failure to have retester's 180.205(b)....................... $4,000.
identification number (RIN).
4. Failure to have current authority 180.205(b)....................... $2,000.
due to failure to renew a retester's
identification number (RIN).
5. Failure to have a retester's 180.205(b)....................... $7,200.
identification number and marking
another RIN on a cylinder.
6. Marking a RIN before successfully 180.205(b)....................... $800.
completing a hydrostatic retest.
7. Representing, marking, or certifying 171.2(c), (e), 178.205(c), $2,000 to $6,000.
a cylinder as meeting the requirements Applicable Exemption.
of an exemption when the cylinder was
not maintained or retested in
accordance with the exemption.
8. Failure to conduct a complete visual 180.205(f)....................... $2,100 to $5,200.
external and internal examination.
9. Failure to conduct visual inspection 180.205(f) & (g)................. $4,200 to $10,400.
or hydrostatic retest.
10. Performing hydrostatic retesting 180.205(g)(3).................... $2,100 to $5,200.
without confirming the accuracy of the
test equipment.
11. Failure to hold hydrostatic test 180.205(g)(5).................... $3,100.
pressure for 30 seconds or
sufficiently longer to allow for
complete expansion.
12. Failure to perform a second retest, 180.205(g)(5).................... $3,100.
after equipment failure, at a pressure
increased by the greater of 10% or 100
psi (includes exceeding 90% of test
pressure prior to conducting a retest).
13. Failure to condemn a cylinder when 180.205(i)....................... $6,000 to $10,800.
required (e.g., permanent expansion of
10% [5% for certain exemption
cylinders], internal or external
corrosion, denting, bulging, evidence
of rough usage).
14. Failure to properly mark a 180.205(i)(2).................... $800.
condemned cylinder or render it
incapable of holding pressure.
15. Failure to notify the cylinder 180.205(i)(2).................... $1,000.
owner in writing when a cylinder has
been condemned.
16. Failure to perform hydrostatic 180.209(a)(1).................... $2,100 to $5,200.
retesting at the minimum specified
test pressure.
17. Marking a star on a cylinder that 180.209(b)....................... $2,000 to $4,000.
does not qualify for that mark.
[[Page 52855]]
18. Marking a ``+'' sign on a cylinder 173.302a(b)...................... $2,000 to $4,000.
without determining the average or
minimum wall stress by calculation or
reference to CGA Pamphlet C-5.
19. Marking a cylinder in or on the 180.213(b)....................... $6,000 to $10,800.
sidewall when not permitted by the
applicable specification.
20. Failure to maintain legible 180.213(b)(1).................... $800.
markings on a cylinder.
21. Marking a DOT 3HT cylinder with a 180.213(c)(2).................... $6,000 to $10,800.
steel stamp other than a low-stress
steel stamp.
22. Improper marking of the RIN or 180.213(d)....................... $800.
retest date on a cylinder.
23. Marking an FRP cylinder with steel Applicable Exemption............. $6,000 to $10,800.
stamps in the FRP area of the cylinder
such that the integrity of the
cylinder is compromised.
24. Failure to maintain current copies 180.215(a)....................... $600 to $1,200.
of 49 CFR, DOT exemptions, and CGA
Pamphlets applicable to inspection,
retesting, and marking activities.
25. Failure to keep complete and 180.215(b).......................
accurate records of cylinder
reinspection and retest.
a. No records kept................. ................................. $4,000.
b. Incomplete or inaccurate records ................................. $1,000 to $3,000.
26. Failure to report in writing a 171.2(c) & (e), Approval Letter.. $600 to $1,200.
change in name, address, ownership,
test equipment, management, or
retester personnel.
--------------------------------------------
Carrier Requirements
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Incident Notification:
1. Failure to give immediate 171.15........................... $3,000.
notification of a reportable hazardous
materials incident.
2. Failure to file a written hazardous 171.16........................... $500 to $2,500.
material incident report within 30
days following an unintentional
release of hazardous materials in
transportation (or other reportable
incident).
B. Shipping Papers:
Failure to retain shipping papers for 174.24(b), 175.30(a)(2), $1,000.
375 days after a hazardous material 176.24(b), 177.817(f).
(or 3 years for a hazardous waste) is
accepted by the initial carrier.
C. Stowage/transportation Requirements:
1. Transporting packages of hazardous Various.......................... $3,000.
material that have not been secured
against movement.
2. Failure to properly segregate Various.......................... $7,500 and up.
hazardous materials.
3. Transporting explosives in a motor 177.835(i)....................... $5,200.
vehicle containing metal or other
articles or materials likely to damage
the explosives or any package in which
they are contained, without
segregating in different parts of the
load or securing them in place in or
on the motor vehicle and separated by
bulkheads or other suitable means to
prevent damage.
4. Transporting railway track torpedoes 171.2(b) & (e)................... $7,000.
outside of flagging kits, in violation
of DOT-E 7991.
5. Transporting Class 7 (radioactive) 177.842(a)....................... $5,000 and up.
material having a total transport
index greater than 50.
6. Transporting Class 7 (radioactive) 177.842(b)....................... $5,000 and up.
material without maintaining the
required separation distance.
7. Failure to comply with requirements 171.2(b) & (e)...................
of an exemption authorizing the
transportation of Class 7
(radioactive) material having a total
transportation index of 50.
a. Failure to have the required ................................. $5,000.
radiation survey record.
b. Failure to have other required ................................. $500 each.
documents.
c. Other violations................ ................................. $5,000 and up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
15. In part IV of appendix A to subpart D of part 107, under Section
IV.C. (``Penalty Increases for Multiple Counts''), the words in the
first sentence ``up to $25,000 ($27,500 for a violation occurring after
January 21, 1997)'' are revised to read: ``up to $32,500 ($27,500 for a
violation occurring after January 21, 1997, and before October 1,
2003).''
0
16. In part IV of appendix A to subpart D of part 107, the text to
Section IV.E. entitled ``Penalty Increases for Prior Violations'' is
revised to read as follows:
The baseline penalty presumes an absence of prior violations. If
prior violations exist, generally they will serve to increase a
proposed penalty.
[[Page 52856]]
The general standards for increasing a baseline proposed penalty on the
basis of prior violations are as follows:
1. For each prior civil or criminal enforcement case--25% increase
over the pre-mitigation recommended penalty.
2. For each prior ticket--10% increase over the pre-mitigation
recommended penalty.
3. A baseline proposed penalty will not be increased more than 100%
on the basis of prior violations.
4. A case or ticket of prior violations initiated in a calendar
year more than six years before the calendar year in which the current
case is initiated normally will not be considered in determining a
proposed penalty for the current violation(s).
PART 171--GENERAL INFORMATION, REGULATIONS, AND DEFINITIONS
0
17. The authority citation for part 171 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101-5127, 44701; 49 CFR 1.45 and 1.53;
Pub. L. 101-410 section 4 (28 U.S.C. 2461 note); Pub. L. 104-134
section 31001.
Sec. 171.1 [Amended]
0
18. In Sec. 171.1, in paragraph (c), the words ``$25,000 ($27,500 for
a violation that occurs after January 21, 1997) and not less than $250
for each violation.'' in the first sentence are revised to read:
``$32,500 and not less than $275 for each violation. (For a violation
that occurred after January 21, 1997, and before October 1, 2003, the
maximum and minimum civil penalties are $27,500 and $250,
respectively.)''
* * * * *
Issued in Washington, DC on August 25, 2003, under authority
delegated in 49 CFR part 1.
Samuel G. Bonasso,
Acting Administrator.
[FR Doc. 03-22569 Filed 9-5-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-60-P