# Baker Petrolite Corporation — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation - **operation:** document - **citation:** 08-0208 - **title:** Baker Petrolite Corporation — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation - **source type:** guidance - **agency:** Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration - **status:** guidance - **official:** true - **published on:** 2008-09-25 - **effective on:** Not available - **summary:** 08-0208 response to Baker Petrolite Corporation concerning 172.101. - **machine formats:** - **json:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-08-0208.json - **markdown:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-08-0208.md - **app url:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-08-0208 - **source url:** https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/2008/080208.pdf **body:** <<>> U.S. Department of Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE Washington, DC 20590 Mr. Aubrey R. Campbell Senior Transportation Specialist Baker Petrolite Corporation 12645 West Airport Blvd. Sugar Land, TX 77478 Ref. No.: 08-0208 Dear Mr. Campbell: This responds to your letter dated August 1,2008, regarding requirements under the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 17 1-1 80) applicable to the use of DOT 5 1 portable tanks. Specifically, you ask if the provisions in $ 17 1.14(d)(4) and 5 173.32(~)(2) allow for DOT 5 1 portable tanks to be used after January 1, 201 0. The January 1, 2010, transitional provision in $ 171.14(d)(4) and grandfather provision in § 173.32(~)(2) were added under Docket HM-215D (66 FR 33316; June 21,2001). The changes made to 171.14(d)(4) allow, until January 1,2010, IM portable tanks to use the "T" Code special provisions listed in Column 7 of the Hazardous Materials Table (HMT; $ 172.101) that were in effect on September 30,2001. The revisions to $ 173.32(~)(2) clearly indicate that a DOT Specification 5 1, IM 101, or IM 102 portable tank may not be manufactured after January 1, 2003. The revisions do not prohibit the use of DOT 5 1 portable tanks after January 1, 20 10. In accordance with $ 172.102(a)(7), DOT 5 1 portable tanks are not subject to the "T" Code special provisions. Therefore, properly requalified and maintained DOT 5 1 portable tanks that meet the design requirements in effect at the time of manufacture and applicable special provisions (e.g. Special Provision B30 for minimum thickness) may continue to be used after January 1,2010 to transport authorized hazardous materials (see Column 8 of the HMT for information on authorized packagings). I hope this satisfies your inquiry. If we can be of further assistance, please contact us. Sincerely, Acting Chief, Standards Development Office of Hazardous Materials Standards <<>> Baker Petrolite P O ~ ~ C L b~ e' T~MLs 12645 West Airport Blvd. Sugar Land, Texas 77478 P.O. Box 5050 Sugar Land 77487-5050 Tel281-276-5400 Fax 281-275-7385 August 1,2008 Office of Hazardous Materials Standards Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, Attn: PHH- 10 U.S. Department of Transportation East Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE Washington, DC 20590-0001 Re: Letter of Clarification Dear Office of Hazardous Materials Standards: Baker Petrolite Corporation (BPC) is requesting a letter of clarification regarding the "Sunset" provision specified in Title 49 Code of Federal Regulation (CFR) Part, . 171.14(d)(4) and 173'.32(c)(2) regarding the.continued use of DOT 5 1 specification. portable tanks beyond January 1,2010. BPC uses DOT 51 portable tanks to ship UN 1092, Acrolein, stabilized, 6.1, (3), PG I, to domestic and international destinations. Our DOT 5 1 portable tanks are periodically tested and inspected in accordance with 49 CFR Part 180. We are concerned about our ability to continue to use the DOT 5 1 portable tanks beyond January 1,201 0. Specifically, 17 1.14(d)(4) states, "Until January 1,20 10 , a hazardous material may be transported in an IM, IMO, or DOT 5 1 Specification portable tank in accordance with the T code (Special Provisions) assigned to a hazardous material in column (7) s f the 171.101 Table in effect on September 30,2001 ." Question # 1 : Is the intent of the "sunset" provision to eliminate the use of DOT 5 1 specification portable tanks after January 1,20 1 O? Question # 2: Is PHMSA considering extending the January 1,201 0 transition date with new rule making? . . . We . are . -. mainly concerned about the'fank-slieli :and.head thickngss . . ... of .. out D,OT-p.oflable tanks c~riipai-&d'to the- ciihent requii-ements ,of T ~0de.s ,722 ;and TP44. listed .&he 172'10 1 fib16 hi' Spidal provisioi1iX6r shipping acrolein: Qur;DOT. 5 i:pQrtable tanks were manufactured using "carbon" steel with a minimum shell thickness of %' inch (6.35mm). Special provision code T22 indicates a minimum shell thickness for "reference" steel of 10 mm for portable tanks. <<>> Special provision code TP44 indicates a minimum shell thickness the greater of 7.62mm for "stainless" steel UN portable tanks or the thickness required for a portable tank with a design pressure at least equal to 1.5 times the vapor pressure of the hazardous materials at 46 degrees C (1 15 degrees F). Question # 3: May BPC continue to use our DOT 51 portable tanks, with the minimum shell thickness of % inch (6.35mm, carbon steel), beyond January 1,201 0 as long as we maintain inspection and testing of tanks in accordance with 49 CFR Part 180? BPC currently uses a fleet of approximately 500 DOT 5 1 specification portable tanks to ship acrolein. Based on our tank integrity testing results, the portable tank manufacturer has indicated that our tanks have a remaining serviceable life of 30 to 40 years. Additionally, we typically deal with relatively low pressures, as the acrolein is in liquid form rather than compressed gas, and the tanks leave our plant at 9- 12 psig, and are never pressurized in field operations above 80 psig. Over the past 40 plus years, we have safely transported thousand of tons of acrolein using these tanks. BPC would like your consideration in allowing us to continue the use of these tanks, under a special permit if necessary, while continuing to monitor their mechanical integrity for the remaining effective life of the tanks. The replacement of such a large tank fleet, which still has 30- 40 years of serviceable life, would have a significant economic impact on BPC. We estimate the cost of purchasing new UN portable tanks at $8,000,000. Please provide us a clarification regarding this issue, as January 1, 20 10 is rapidly approaching and the economics of addressing this issue must be addressed. Additionally, others within the chemical manufacturing and transportation industries may have similar concerns on the continued use of DOT 5 1 specification portable tanks. Sincerely, Baker Petrolite Corporation Aubrey GQV . Campbell Senior Transportation Specialist - **truncated:** false - **body characters:** 6145