{"operation":"document","citation":"15-0190","title":"Worthington Industries — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2016-03-29","effective_on":null,"summary":"15-0190 response to Worthington Industries concerning 178.273, 178.277.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-15-0190.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-15-0190.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-15-0190","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/2016/150190.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nof Transportatior\nJ.S. Departmen\n1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE\nWashington, D.C. 20590\nMaterials Safety\nPipeline and Hazardous\nAdministration\nMAR 2 9 2016\nSteve Gentry\nWorthington Industries\n200 Old Wilson Bridge Road\nColumbus, Ohio 43085\nRef. No. 15-0190\nDear Mr. Gentry:\nThis responds to your September 23, 2015 email requesting clarification of the Hazardous\nMaterials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180) applicable to the design and\nconstruction of portable tanks intended for the transportation of refrigerated liquefied gases.\nSpecifically, you describe a proposed vent line for ISO portable tanks. The manual vent line\nwould be used to discharge lading vapor to the atmosphere in a controlled fashion, prior to the\ninitiation of a pressure relief device. Your questions are paraphrased and answered as\nfollows:\nQ1. Is the proposed vapor vent line considered a discharge opening as it applies to\n§ 178.277(d)(1)?\nAl. No. It is the opinion of this Office that discharge openings are openings which are\nmeant for the loading or unloading of hazardous material. Therefore, the requirements\nof § 178.277(d)(1) would not apply to the proposed vapor vent line, unless it is used\nfor the loading or unloading of hazardous material.\nQ2. Do vapor vent lines on portable tanks manufactured to the requirements in\n§ 178.277 require multiple independent shut-off devices?\nA2. For ISO portable tanks, § 178.277 only applies to openings which are meant for\nhe loading or unloading of hazardous material. Therefore, a vapor vent line a\nescribed would not require multiple independent shut-off device:\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\nAlso, please note that the installation of the proposed vent line on an approved portable tank\ndesign would constitute a modification of an approved portable tank. Thus, the portable tank\nwith the proposed manual vent line installed would be subject to the requirements in\n§ 178.273(e).\nI trust this satisfies your inquiry. Please contact us if we can be of further assistance.\nSincerely,\nthe pito\nChief, Standards Development Branch\nStandards and Rulemaking Division\n\n<<<PAGE 3>>>\n\nCiccarone\n$/78.277\nPackaging Specs.\n15-0190\nWORTHINGTON\nINDUSTRIES\nSeptember 23, 2015\nU.S. Department of Transportation\nPHMSA Office of Hazardous Materials Standards\nPHH-10\nEast Building\n1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.\nWashington, DC 20590-0001\nSubmitted via: phmsa.hm-infocenter@dot.gov\nDear Madam or Sir:\nWorthington Cylinder Corporation is requesting an interpretation of 49 CFR 178.277 \"Requirements for\nthe design, construction, inspection and testing of portable tanks intended for the transportation of\nrefrigerated liquefied gases.\"\nBackground Information\nWorthington Cylinder Corporation manufactures ISO containers fitted within structural frames that are\nused to transport flammable cryogenic ladings such as liquefied natural gas (LNG), liquefied ethane and\nliquefied ethylene. These containers can be loaded onto and removed from a transport vehicle, typically\na ship or truck, and are considered portable tanks as previously determined by U.S. Department of\nTransportation (interpretation reference number 07-0208 dated 21-Feb-2008).\nBased on this interpretation, ISO containers are manufactured in accordance with the 49 CFR 178.277\nspecification referenced above.\nWorthington would like to modify the piping on the ISO containers we currently manufacture to include\na manual vent from the vapor space of the container. This manual vent will discharge the lading vapor\nphase only to atmosphere, through a separate pipe controlled by a manual valve, to a safe place on the\ncontainer assembly. This manual vent will be offered as an option to our standard design.\nThe purpose of the manual vent is to provide the operator the capability to reduce the pressure in the\ncontainer in a controlled fashion before any relief devices open. If the container is cold and the lading\nnot used, the container will rise in pressure with time and eventually reach the relief device opening\npressure setting. This situation can happen during a long transport or storage times after filling or when\na partially full or empty container is warming to ambient temperatures. While the opening of the relief\ndevice is safe, it can be problematic. This also can cause discharge of the lading vapor in inconvenient\nplaces or situations. The feature of a manual vent gives the operator a chance to control this situation.\n200 Old Wilson Bridge Road Columbus, Ohio 43085\n\n<<<PAGE 4>>>\n\n49 CFR 178.277 (d) (1) \"Service equipment\" of the specification referenced above requires that \"each\nfilling and discharge opening in portable tanks used for the transport of flammable refrigerated liquefied\ngases must be fitted with at least three mutually independent shut-off devices in series: the first being a\nstop-valve situated as close as reasonably practicable to the jacket, the second being a stop-valve and the\nthird being a blank flange or equivalent device. The shut-off device closest to the jacket must be a self-\nclosing device, which is capable of being closed from an accessible position on the portable tank that is\nremote from the valve within 30 seconds of actuation. This device must actuate at a temperature of not\nmore than 121°C (250°F).\" Worthington refers to the self-closing shut-off device closest to the jacket\nthat closes on thermal conditions as a fire-block valve.\nThe requirement cited above for a fire-block valve and a blank flange or equivalent device in the\ndischarge piping makes the intended use of the manual vent impractical. It is necessary to place the\ndischarge point of the vapor at the top-most point so that vapor can discharge vertically up and away\nfrom personnel and property. This is the safest point of discharge for the vapor. The blind flange must\nbe located at the end of the vent pipe per the CFR requirements. This makes access to the blind flange\ndifficult and time consuming. It will also require the use of tools to remove the flange thus requiring\nadditional time in what could be an acute situation. The fire-block valve also requires the use of a tool\nto open thus requiring additional time over and above that required by a normal manual valve. Removal\nof the fire-block valve and blind flange in the manual vent pipe would remove these encumbrances.\nCargo tanks designed and fabricated to 49 CFR 178.338 may carry the identical ladings, operate in\nsimilar environments and have basically the same design requirements as portable tanks specified by 49\nCFR 178.277. However, in 49 CFR 178.338-11, the cargo tank specification expressly states that only\nliquid filling and liquid discharge lines require a manual shut-off valve and an automatic shut-off valve\nthat can be shut off remotely and automatically in the case of fire. No mention is made of vapor\ndischarge lines requiring more than one closure device. Additionally, 49 CFR 178.338-7 (b), is\nconsistent with the fact that only liquid lines require more than one closure device. Paraphrasing 49\nCFR 178.338-7 (b), .... If the leakage of a single valve, except a gas phase manual vent valve, would\npermit loss of flammable material, an additional closure that is leak tight at the tank design pressure\nmust be provided outboard of such valve, providing further evidence that vapor lines are not required to\nhave more than one closure device in the line by the cargo tank specification.\nAs you can see, there is what Worthington considers to be an inconsistency between 2 container\nspecification requirements that may be in the same location and contain the identical commodities.\nWorthington respectfully poses the following 2 questions to DOT keeping in mind above the\nbackground information.\nQuestion 1\nWorthington does not consider the proposed vapor vent line (as defined and described above) as a\ndischarge line as defined in 49 CFR 178.277. Does DOT concur?\nQuestion 2\n49 CFR 178.338 requires 2 independent shutoff devices for liquid lines. In as much, the assumption is\nmade that vapor lines do not require 2 independent shutoff devices and in fact, newly fabricated\n200 Old Wilson Bridge Road Columbus, Ohio 43085\n\n<<<PAGE 5>>>\n\ncontainers manufactured to 49 CFR 178.338 do not have 2 shutoff devices on the vapor lines. Does\nDOT concur that vapor lines on 49 CFR 178.277 and 49 CFR 178.338 do not require multiple\nindependent shutoff devices?\nThank you for your time and consideration in this matter. If any questions arise, please contact me at\n614-438-3057 or steve.gentry @worthingtonindustries.com.\nRespectfully Submitted:\nSteven T. Gentry\nSteven T. Gentry\nRegulatory Affairs Manager\nWorthington Cylinder Corporation\nCc:\nMr. Stan Staniszewshi - U.S. Department of Transportation\nstanley.staniszewski@dot.gov\n200 Old Wilson Bridge Road Columbus, Ohio 43085\n\n<<<PAGE 6>>>\n\nDodd, Alice (PHMSA)\nFrom:\nGeller, Shelby CTR (PHMSA)\nSent:\nFriday, September 25, 2015 4:36 PM\nTo:\nHazmat Interps\nSubject:\nFW: Letter of Interpretation\nAttachments:\nLetter of Interpretation 092215.pdf\nDear Shante and Alice,\nAttached is a request for a formal letter of interpretation.\nThanks,\nShelby\nFrom: Gentry, Steve [mailto:Steve.Gentry@worthingtonindustries.com]\nSent: Friday, September 25, 2015 1:42 PM\nTo: PHMSA HM InfoCenter\nSubject: Letter of Interpretation\nWorthington Cylinder Corporation is requesting an Interpretation as outlined in our attached letter.\nThank you\n.....","truncated":false,"body_characters":9363}