{"operation":"document","citation":"00-0197","title":"Barlen and Associates, Inc. — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2000-08-22","effective_on":null,"summary":"00-0197 response to Barlen and Associates, Inc. concerning 171.1.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-00-0197.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-00-0197.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-00-0197","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/2000/000197.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nf Transportatio\n.S. Departmer\nWashington, D.C. 20590\n400 Seventh St., S.W.\nesearch an\nAdministration\npecial Program\nAUG 22 2000\nMr. William Barlen\nRef. No: 00-0197\nBarlen and Associates, Inc.\n90 Dorset Lane\nMadison, Connecticut 06443-8107\nDear Mr. Barlen:\nThis is in response to your letter of July 17, 2000, requesting information on the applicability of the\nHazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180) to DOT specification cylinders for\npersonal use.\nAs specified in § 171.1, the HMR govern the safe transportation of hazardous materials in intrastate,\ninterstate, and foreign commerce. Therefore, a DOT specification cylinder used to supply liquefied\npetroleum gas for cooking and heating at a consumer location, which is filled at that location and never\ntransported in commerce, is not subject to the HMR. There is no need to remove the specification\nmarking from the cylinder.\nFor your information, although not required by the HMR, we recommend testing of any cylinder\nbeyond its retest date prior to refilling the cylinder.\nI hope this information is helpful.\nSincerely,\n-The\nan I. Allan\nfor\nEdward T. Mazzullo\nDirector, Office of Hazardous\nMaterials Standards\n000197\n174\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\n....\n8924\nBARLEN and ASSOCIATES, Inc.\nWilliam Barlen\nConsulting to the Compressed Gas Industry\nMadison Connecticut 06443-8107\n90 Dorset Lane\n• Telephone (203) 421-3864\n• e-mail - Barlen@gas-consulting.com\n• Telecopier (203) 421-3863\nRSPA\nOffice of Hazardous Materials Standards (DHM-10)\nLavalle\nU.S. Department of Transportation\n400 Seventh Street SW\nS171.1\nWashington, DC 20590-0001\n00-0197 17 July 2000\nRE:\n\"Request for Interpretation of a DOT regulation\"\ncylinder in commerce, does the cylinder have to be retested and maintained as prescribed\nQuestion. If a DOT cylinder is going to be filled for a use that will not involve shipping the\nin 49 CFR?\nSpecifically the DOT has written an interpretation - I have not seen the letter - but several people\nthat propane cylinders used in barbecue grill service (25 pounds capacity and smaller) did not fall\non an industry safety committee I am serving on have seen it. That interpretation apparently says\nunder DOT regulations since they \"were not in commercial commerce.\"\nBased on that interpretation, committee members on NFPA 58 (Standard for the Storage and\nrequalify DOT cylinders - generally 100 pound capacity - used for cooking and heating at\nhandling of Liquefied Petroleum Gases) have recently removed the requirement to inspect and\nconsumer locations. Those cylinders are filled at the user location and are not transported.\nPersonally, as a retired Technical Director of the Compressed Gas Association, and someone with\n40 plus years in the compressed gas industry, my interpretation of 49 CFR has always been that if\na cylinder was made to a DOT specification and was marked \"DOT\" it had to meet all requirements\nbe maintained and retested to DOT requirements.\nof the specification or exemption and\nIf the key to a cylinder being DOT compliant was only \"if used in commercial transportation\",\n• Could fiber wrapped cylinders made to an exemption that requires their removal from\n•service at the end of 15 years, stay in service if the user promised not to ship them?\n• Could a filler cited during a DOT inspection for filling a cylinder out of test, avoid a fine by\n• Could a user mark any container \"DOT\" if they promised not to ship it?\nswearing that the cylinder was only going into storage for use on site ?\nI feel since a person moving/transporting it in the future would have to rely that it had been filled to\nwith CFR 49.\nconform to DOT regulations, that unless the DOT markings were removed, it had to always comply\nI look forward to your response.\nSincerely,\nWelian Bak,\nWilliam Barlen","truncated":false,"body_characters":3780}