EMAIL TO PMAA UST TASK FORCE MEMBER FROM MAJOR PETROLEUM MARKETER

INSURANCE PROVIDER: This follows up on our conversation about a potential for increased exposure to accidents that might result from the proposed storage tank rules. The c
- store industry h as not been required to do many of the associated tasks before so it’s not surprising to find very limited injury

data related to this. While I'm not able to discuss specific claims, as you guessed there have been several emplo yee injury mishaps that occur in a c
- store parking lots, and many of these are associated with slip, trip, or fall incidents. Some incidents occurred where a vehicle struck an employee such as b y a car cutting through a driveway when the employee was going to the pumps or around the building but this ty

pe of injury

seems to be infrequent. Fatal incidents are investigated b y the Department of Labor and a public record is available. For example, searching within SI C 5411 (convenience stores) you can find one fatality from a vehicle, but this was not a tank
- related task. See http://www.osha.gov/pls/imis/establishment.inspection_detail?id=311289417 In the forwarded anal ys is: Page 5
- 14 shows a Footn ote [35] where "... EPA estimates that monthly walkthrough inspections of a facility will take nearly

an hour to complete, on average. A compliant owner or operator in a state that does not currentl y have this requirement will need to allocate 12 man
- hours of incremental effort per year to satisfy this portion of the proposed rule." I want to share my

opinion of which is not an exhaustive or comprehensive evaluation of the potential exposure and should not be considered legal advice regarding the unique ne eds for a specific operation.

 The cost model may not have taken into consideration the employee turnover and how it affects the quality of inspection or impact to other store operations. Since the function of a c - store em ployee is to generally supervise t ransactions from customers, the added tasks could impose a cost for having a second employee to either handle the tank related tasks or to handle customer transactions for an hour, plus time/travel expense if rotating from a secondary location.

 Vehicle da ma ge to dispensers and signs is common and is why post barrier guards are used. C stores are usually sited to facilitate vehicles that may enter from relatively fast paced traffic. An yone looking inside an access hole would not have the same situational aw areness that a pedestrian on the lot would have for oncoming traffic. A driver may not easily see the employee if they are bending over inspecting a sump. This could increase an exposure that is not currently experienced with much frequency.

 Job descript ions and qualifications may need to be modified. Specialized knowledge and training should be considered along with the functional capacity for an employee to do the physical work. A person hired to operate a register and activate an emergency stop may

not be necessarily able to lift a steel cover in the driveway. This could impact employ me nt related practices for some that are disabled or have other work restrictions.

 Many

high volume fuel sale locations only have an attendant in a booth on the center is land, and they leave only at shift change or an emergency. At such locations, outside tasks are generally handled by others so additional tasks would need to be arranged with a maintenance department of contracted out. This may be a crime/security/safety i ssue, as well.