{"operation":"document","citation":"05-0071","title":"Determan Brownie, Inc. — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2005-04-27","effective_on":null,"summary":"05-0071 response to Determan Brownie, Inc. concerning 178.345.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-05-0071.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-05-0071.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-05-0071","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/2005/050071.pdf","body":"<<>>\n\nf Transportation\nJ.S. Departmen\n400 Seventh Street, S.W.\nWashington, D.C. 20590\nPipeline and\nAdministration\nHazardous Materials Safety\nAPR 27 2005\nMr. Dave Anderson\nRef No.: 05-0071\n1241 - 72nd Avenue Northeast\nDeterman Brownie, Inc.\nMinneapolis, MN 55432\nDear Mr. Anderson,\nThis is in response to your letter dated March 24, 2005, requesting clarification of the\nrequirements contained in the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts\n00-185) applicable to manufacturing and retesting a DOT Specification 406 cargo tank\nmotor vehicle (CTMV). Specifically, you ask several questions regarding the testing\nrequirements for a DOT Specification 406 CTMV. In addition, you indicate that the\ncargo tank does not meet the requirements prescribed in Part 178, Subpart J for the\nspecification.\nYour questions are paraphrased and answered as follows:\nQ1.\nMay a company that is not registered with the Department, in accordance with\nPart 107, Subpart F, manufacture a DOT Specification 406 CTMV?\nAl. No. The definition of a manufacturer provided in § 178.320 states that a\nmane Hue mus register it the Do parimate inaccordanse with Pant Sue a o\nspecification cargo tank or CTMV unless that person is registered.\not the HMR.\nA2. No. Section 180.417(a)(3) applies to DOT specification CTMVs manufactured\nbefore September 1, 1995. However, even if the CTMV was manufactured prior to\nSeptember 1, 1995, you may not prepare a manufacturer's certificate based on\ninformation supplied by a person who was not authorized to manufacture the CTMV.\nQ3.\nMay the owner of the CTMV create the documents that are required to be\nmaintained by § 178.345-15?\nA3.\nNo. The owner of the CTMV is not permitted to create the documents identified\nin § 178.345-15. The documents must be supplied to the owner by the manufacturer of\nthe CTMV. This includes the certification documents that display the registration\n178-345-15 (a)(b)\n050071\n\n<<>>\n\nnumber of the manufacturer, the Design Certifying Engineer, and the Registered\nInspector. (\nIn addition, these documents must include a certificate signed by a responsible\nofficial of the manufacturer and a Design Certifying Engineer certifying that the CTMV\nmeets the applicable specification.\nBecause the owner is unable to provide any of the required documents and because the\nperson who manufactured the CTV was not an authorized manufacturer, the cargo tank\nmust be certified under the procedures applicable to newly constructed cargo tanks. In\nthe situation described in your letter, you would be converting a non-specification CTMV\ninto a DOT specification CTMV. To accomplish this, your company could become the\nmanufacturer of the CTMV and issue the certificates identified in § 178.345-15. This\nwould entail registration as a cargo tank manufacturer in accordance with Part 107,\nSubpart F and performance of all tests and inspections under Part 178, Subpart J, as\napplicable to the DOT Specification 406 CTMV described in your documented QC\nprogram used to obtain your ASME Code \"U\" stamp.\nI hope this information is helpful. Please contact us if you require additional assistance.\nSincerely,\nPresto\nOffice of Hazardous Materials Standards\n\n<<>>\n\nPage 1 of 3\nGorsky, Susan \nFrom:\nShelton, Danny \nSent:\n05-0071\nThursday, March 24, 2005 1:03 PM\nTo:\nDelorenzo, Joseph ; Mannikko, Michael \nCc:\nWilliam \nHochman, Charles ; Solomey, Joe ; Gorsky, Susan ; Quade,\nSubject: RE: re-certify DOT cargo tanks\nJoe, I wanteil to get back to you as soon as possible on this situation.\ndiscussed this scenario with Charles Hochman, Director, Office of Hazardous\nI have\nMaterials Technology and Joe Solomey, Assistant Chief Counsel, Pipeline and\nHazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) regarding this situation.\nis a summary of our discussions.\nHere\n1. Is Interpipe LLC authorized to manufacture a DOT specification cargo tank?\ntherefcre they were not authorized to manufacture a DOT Specification\nInterpipe LLC was never registered with the Department\npackage.\na.\nNo person may engage in the manufacture, assembly, certification,\n49 CFR S 107.502 (b)\ninspection or repair of a cargo tank or cargo tank motor vehicle\nmanufactured under the terms of a DOT specification under subchapter C\nperson is registered with the Department in accordance with the\nan exemption issued under this part unless the\ncertifying engineer is considered to be registered if the person's\nprovisions of this subpart. A person employed as an inspector or design\nemployer is registered.\n2. Can Determan Brownie, Inc. prepare a certificate of compliance that indicates\nInterpipe Inc. LLC is the\nmarking on the tank in accordance with 49 CFR $ 180.417 (a) (3).\ncargo tank manufacturer based on the specification\nmanufactured before September 1, 1995, therefore, Determan Brownie, Inc.\nSection 180.417 (a) (3) only applies to DOT cargo tanks\ncannot create a certificate of compliance based on information displayed on a\ntan a a stone to top yed on a\nmanufacture a specification package.\nspecification plate prepared by a manufacture wino was not authorized to\n3. Can the motor carrier (owner) produce the documents they are required to\nmaintain in accordance with\n49 CFR § 178.345-15.\nResponse: No. It is our understanding that the motor carrier (Owner) is\nThis includes the certification documents including the registration numbers\nunable io provide the required documents identified in 49 CFR § 178.345-15.\nof the manufacturer, the Design Certifying Engineer and the Registered\nEngineering certifying that the cargo tank moto:: vehicle design meets the\nInspector and the signatures of the manufacture: and the Design Certifying\napplicable specification.\na. 178.345-15 (a) and (b)\nal At or before the time of delivery, the manufacturer of a cargo tank\nmotor vehicle must provide certification documents to the owner of the\ncargo tank motor vehicle. The registration numbers of the manufacturer,\nappropriate, must appear on the certificates (see subpart F, part 107\nthe Design Certifying Engineer, and the Registered Inspector, as\n3/24/2005\n\n<<>>\n\nPage 2 of 3\nspecifications must provide:\n(b) The manufacturer of\na cargo tank motor vehicle made to any of these\nofficial of the manufacturer and a Design Certifying Engineer\n(b) (1) For each design type, a certificate signed by a responsible\napplicable specification; and\ncertifying that the cargo tank motor vehicle design meets the\nConclusion:\nrequired and because the person who manufactured the tank was not authorized to\nBecause the owner is unable to provide any of the baseline documents\nmanufacturer a DOT specification cargo tank, even though the person was issued a\n\"U\" stamp, tire certification of these tanks would be considered new construction\nYes, this can be accomplished but Determan Brownie would become the manufacturer\nand would be akin to converting a non-specification tank to a specification tank.\nand be required to issue the certifications identified in 49 CFR 178.345-15.\nrequired to perform all tests and inspections including quality control procedures\nBecause Determan Browning, Inc. would be considered the manufacturer, they would be\nthat are associated with the issuance of a \"U\" stamp.\npossible. As always thanks to everyone for the timely responses.\nSusan,\nwe need a written interpretation regarding this situation as soon as\nFrom: Delorerzo, Joseph\n-----Original Message-- - - -\nTo: Shelton, Danny\nSent: Thursday, March 24, 2005 10:03 AM\nSubject: FW: re-certify DOT cargo tanks\nCc: Mannikko, Michael\nconfirmation all they have to do is thickness test so I can let him know where this\nThis is the question I need answered in writing from RSPA. Can you give me verbal\nis going?\nFrom: Anderson, Dave [mailto:davea@determan.com]\n-----Original Message- - - -\nTo: Delorenzo, Joseph\nSent: Thursday, March 17, 2005 12:22 PM\nSubject: re-certify DOT cargo tanks\nmy questions\nGood morning Joe. Please send\nfor the Inter-pipe tanks ( three units total) which we have\na response for clarification regarding\nbeen discussing with yourself, MN DOT Michael Ritchie, and RSPA.\nOne is that they have been marked DOT/MC 406, the other way is that the\nQuestion one: The specification plates has been mis-marked in two ways.\nthickness is incorrect.\nMS, head is actually .127 and shell is 3/16\" :\nTwo have both materials (shell & head)\none has the shell at\nas 3/16\"\nunderstanding is that we are we to verify thickness and determine if they\n• and and the head at 3/16\" (backwards from what they actually are)\ntest the present welds on this unit? I did not think that we had to do\nmeet min design for DOT 406? The question has come up that we have to\nwill go through the entire unit to verify that. we have all the\nPlease verify that question. Our DCE, (Ken Brors) and\ncorrect equipnent to meet 406 on the cargo tanks. Any questions please\ncall me at 763-502-9662\nAnderson Determan Brownie Inc.\n•Thanks for all your help in this matter. Dave\nInternal Virus Database is out-of-date.\n3/24/2005\n\n<<>>\n\nPage 3 of 3\nVersion: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.7.1 - Release Date: 3/9/05\nChecked by AVG Anti-Virus.\n3/24/2005","truncated":false,"body_characters":9169}