{"operation":"document","citation":"16-0111","title":"MansourGavin, LPA — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2017-04-05","effective_on":null,"summary":"16-0111 response to MansourGavin, LPA concerning 178.35, 178.36, 178.42.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-16-0111.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-16-0111.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-16-0111","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/2017/160111.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nU.S. Department\nof Transportation\nPipeline and Hazardous\nMaterials Safety\nAdministration\n1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE\nWashington, DC 20590\nAPR 0 5 2017\nMr. Jeffrey M. Embleton, Esq.\nMansourGavin, LP A\n1001 Lakeside A venue, Suite 1400\nCleveland, OH 44114\nReference No. 16-0111\nDear Mr. Embleton:\nThis letter is in response to your June 21, 2016, letter on behalf of your client requesting\nclarification of the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180) applicable\nto the inspection of threads on DOT 3A, 3AX, and 3E seamless steel cylinders. You state that in\norder to ensure the threads are built \"to gauge,\" your client uses a statistical sampling size of\nC = 0, AQL = 1.5% (per Acceptance Number Sampling Plans, N.L. Squeglia, ASQC, 4th\nEdition), along with additional processes identified in an established quality plan. You also\nprovide examples of more stringent statistical sampling sizes, such as C = 0, AQL = 0.4% and\nC = 0, AQL = 0.1 %, and specifically ask which is the most appropriate method for the inspection\nof cylinder threads.\nIn accordance with§§ 178.36(h)(l) and 178.42(e)(l), the threads on a DOT 3A, 3AX, or 3E\ncylinder are required to be \"clean cut, even, without checks, and to gauge.\" It is the\nmanufacturer's responsibility determine how best to ensure the threads on each cylinder meet the\nappropriate specification, whether by testing each or by some sample set according to a quality\nplan.\nPlease note that a DOT 3A, 3AX, or 3E cylinder is also required to be inspected and analyzed by\nan inspector as designated in§ 178.35(bl. Specifically, the designated inspector is required in\naccordance with§ 178.35(c)(3)(vi) to \"verify threads by gauge\" to determine cylinder\ncompliance with the applicable specification. Furthermore,§ 178.35(c)(4) requires that the\ninspector's report be prepared in accordance with Compressed Gas Association (CGA) C-11.\nSpecifically, CGA C-11 requires that for seamless cylinders, \"threaded openings in each cylinder\nshall be inspected and gauged for compliance with the design specification as well as quality.\n•As specified in§ l 78.35(b), a DOT 3A or 3AX cylinder must be inspected and verified by an Independent\nInspection Agency (IIA). A DOT 3E cylinder must be inspected and verified by either an IIA or a competent\ninsnector of the manufacturer.\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\nPerformance of this inspection shall be verified by the inspector.\" Therefore, in addition to the\nmanufacturer's responsibility, the designated inspector must inspect the cylinders in order to\nverify and assure that the threads are built \"to gauge.\"\nI hope this information is helpful. Please contact us if we can be of further assistance.\n$2/ci\nu~e0\nChief, Standards Development Branch\nStandards and Rulemaking Division\n\n<<<PAGE 3>>>\n\nDodd, Alice (PHMSA)\nFrom:\nSent:\nTo:\nSubject:\nAttachments:\nRivera, Jordan CTR (PHMSA)\nFriday, June 24, 2016 1:46 PM\nHazmat Interps\nFW: Gauging of threads on Specification Cylinders\nRequest re Gauging of Threads on spec cylinder 6-21-16.pdf\nHi Shante/Alice,\nPlease submit this as a letter of interpretation . Please let me know if you have any questions.\nThanks,\nJordan\nFrom: Ellen Stefanac [mailto :EStefanac@mqqmlpa.com] On Behalf Of Jeffrey Embleton\nSent: Tuesday, June 21, 2016 10:16 AM\nTo: PHMSA HM lnfoCenter\nSubject: Gauging of threads on Specification Cylinders\nJeffrey :M. P.m6Ceton\n•• I MANSOURGAVIN I LP.A\nNorth Point Tower\n1001 Lakeside Ave., Suite 1400\nCleveland, Ohio 44114\n8 216.453.5905 (Direct Dial)\n8 216-310-3416 (Cell)\n• 216.523.1500\n~ 216.523.1705\n121 JEmbleton@mggmlpa.com\nwww.mggmlpa.com\nCONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: THE INFORMATION IN THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE AND ANY ATTACHMENTS IS SENT BY AN ATTORNEY OR HIS/HER\nAGENT, IS INTENDED TO BE CONFIDENTIAL AND FOR THE USE OF ONLY THE INTENDED RECIPIENT. THE INFORMATION MAY BE\nPROTECTED BY ATTORNEY/CLIENT PRIVILEGE, WORK PRODUCT IMMUNITY OR OTHER LEGAL RULES. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE\nIS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE NOTIFIED THAT RETENTION , DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS E-MAIL IS\nSTRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU RECEIVE THIS E-MAIL IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY BY RETURN E-MAIL OR BY TELEPHONE\nAT U.S.A. (216) 523-1500 AND DELETE THIS MESSAGE. THANK YOU.\n1\n\n<<<PAGE 4>>>\n\n• • I tv1ANSOUR GAVIN I LPA\nJeffrey M. Embleton, Esq.\nJEmbleton@mgqmlpa.com\nDirect Dial 21 6-453-5905\nJune 21, 2016\nU.S. DOT\nPHMSA Office of Hazardous Materials Standards\nAttn: PHH-10\nEast Building\n1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.\nWashington, DC 20590-0001\nIn re: Request for Interpretation Regarding\nGauging of Threads on Specification Cylinders\nDear Representative,\nOur Client (\"Company A\") is a registered manufacturer of DOT Specification\nCylinders. As a result, Company A is subject to the inspection requirements set forth in\n49 CFR 178.36(h)(1) and 178.42(e)(1) (together, the \"Regulations\"), which address the\nspecifications for 3A and 3AX seamless steel cylinders and 3E seamless steel cylinders,\nrespectively. On behalf of Company A, we are seeking an interpretation of the\nRegulations.\nWith respect to the inspections referenced in the Regulations, Company A has\nhistorically used statistical sampling sizes of C=O, AQL = 1.5% (per Acceptance Number\nSampling Plans, N.L. Squeglia, ASQC, 4th Edition), coupled with in-process inspection\naccording to a pre-determined quality plan for the relevant products. These sampling\nplans are widely accepted quality control techniques used in a variety of industries, and\nhave been successfully utilized by Company A for more than twenty years.\nHowever, a recent review of the Regulations has resulted in our client seeking\nthis request for interpretation, specifically as to the requirement that \"Threads must be\nclean cut, even, without checks, and to gauge.\" See 49 CFR 178.36(h)(1 ), 49 CFR\n178.42(e)(1 ). Accordingly, we submit the following questions for your consideration:\n01: Can proven statistical sampling, as described above in the second\nparagraph, be used for thread inspection and meet the requirement\" ... to gauge\" as cited\nin to 49 CFR 178.36(h)(1) and 49 CFR 178.42(e)(1)?\n1111\nNor th Point Tower I 1001 Lokeside Avenue I Suite 1 400 I Cleveland , OH 44114 I p : 21 6.523 .1500 I f : 216 .523.1705 I w: mggmlpa.com\n\n<<<PAGE 5>>>\n\nMANSOUR GAVIN LPA\nU.S. DOT\nPHMSA Office of Hazardous Materials Standards\nJune21,201 6\nPage 2\n02: If the sampling plan noted in 01 is interpreted as not meeting the\nrequirement \" ... to gauge\" as cited in to 49 CFR 178.36 (h)(1) and 49 CFR 178.42(e)(1 ),\nwould a more stringent statistical sampling plan be deemed acceptable towards meeting\nthis aforementioned requirement, such as C=O, AOL = 0.4%; or C=O, AOL = 0.1 %? If\nso, please advise which of these sampling plans would be deemed acceptable.\nYour help in interpreting the Regulations with respect to thread gauging sampling\nplans is greatly appreciated. Feel free to contact the undersigned for any questions or\nreply if you have any questions.\nBest regards,\nJME:ens","truncated":false,"body_characters":6972}