{"operation":"document","citation":"17-0122","title":"HazMat Resources, Inc. — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2018-07-12","effective_on":null,"summary":"17-0122 response to HazMat Resources, Inc. concerning 178.345, 178.347.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-17-0122.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-17-0122.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-17-0122","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/docs/standards-rulemaking/hazmat/interpretations/60216/170122.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\n0\nU.S. Department\nof Transportation\nPipeline and Hazardous\nMaterials Safety\nAdministration\n1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE\nWashington, DC 20590\nJUL 1 2 2018\nMr. Danny Shelton\nPresident\nHazMat Resources, Inc.\n124 Rainbow Drive, Suite 24 71\nLivingston, TX 77399-1024\nReference No. 17-0122\nDear Mr. Shelton:\nThis letter is in response to your November 1, 2017, email requesting clarification of the\nHazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180) applicable to the marking and\ninspection of U.S. Department of Transportation specification cargo tank motor vehicles\n(CTMV). We have paraphrased and answered your questions as follows:\nQ 1. You ask if the manufactured thickness must be marked on a nameplate when the\nmanufacturer builds in a corrosion allowance.\nAl. The answer is yes. As prescribed in§ 178.345-14(b)(13) and (14), the manufactured\nthickness is required to be marked on a CTMV nameplate when additional thickness is\nprovided by the manufacturer for corrosion allowance.\nQ2. You note that a CTMV is not required to have a vacuum breaker if its tank is designed to\nbe loaded by vacuum or built to withstand a full vacuum. Therefore, you ask how a\nregistered inspector is to determine if the CTMV meets the specification requirement if\nthere is no indication on the nameplate that its tank is designed to be loaded by vacuum\nor built to withstand a full vacuum.\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\nA2. Section § 178.345-14(b) of the HMR prescribes the information required to be marked on\na cargo tank's nameplate, in addition to any applicable information required by the\nASME Code. Paragraph UG-116(a)(4) in Section VIII of the 2015 ASME Code requires\nthe maximum allowable working pressure (MA WP) to be marked on the nameplate as\n\"maximum allowable working pressure (internal or external),\" when specified as a design\ncondition. Consequently, if the marked MA WP ( external) is below 1 atmosphere\n(14. 7 psi), it does not meet the exemption requirements of § 178 .34 7-4(b) and vacuum\nrelief devices (e.g., breaker) are required.\nI hope this information is helpful. Please contact us if we can be of further assistance.\nSincerely,\nA-C. \\\nShane C. Kelley\nDirector,\nStandards and Rulemaking Division\nOffice of Hazardous Materials Standards\n\n<<<PAGE 3>>>\n\nJanuary, lkeya CTR (PHMSA)\nFrom:\nSent:\nTo:\nSubject:\nFoster, Glenn (PHMSA)\nMonday, November 06, 2017 12:26 PM\nDodd, Alice (PHMSA); January, Ikeya CTR (PHMSA)\nIssues with Specification Plates\n11- O(d-J.-\nAlice/ lkeya,\nPlease have the following inquiry checked in as a request for a Letter of Interpretation and assign it to a Specialist.\nThanks,\nGlenn\nFrom: Daniel Shelton [mailto:dshelton@hazmatresources.com]\nSent: Wednesday, November 01, 2017 10:39 AM\nTo: Foster, Glenn (PHMSA) <Glenn.Foster@dot.gov>\nCc: Bomgardner, Paul (FMCSA) <paul.bomgardner@dot.gov>; Fleener, Arthur (FMCSA) <arthur.fleener@dot.gov>; Ellis,\nSuzanne (FMCSA) <Suzanne.Ellis@dot.gov>; Ford, David (FMCSA) <david.ford@dot.gov>; Simmons, James (FMCSA)\n<james.simmons@dot.gov>; Solomey, Joe (OST) <Joe.Solomey@dot.gov>\nSubject: Issues with Specification Plates\nGood morning Mr. Foster,\nWhen a DOT 407 stainless steel cargo tank is manufacturer, it is my understanding that the manufactured thickness is\nrequired to be on the specification plate so one can calculate the corrosion allowance when performing a thickness test.\nQuestion: Is the manufactured thickness required to stamped on the specification plate for a cargo tank when the\nmanufacture builds in a corrosion allowance.\nIt is my understand that a DOT 407 is not required to have a vacuum breaker if the tanks is \"designed to be loaded by\nvacuum\" or \"built to withstand full vacuum\". How does a registered inspector determine if the cargo tank meets the\nspecification requirement when there is no indication on the specification plate that the cargo tank is \"designed to be\nloaded by vacuum\" or \"built to withstand full vacuum\"?\nQuestion: How does the registered inspector determine whether or not a vacuum breaker is required on a DOT 407\ncargo tank.\nRegards\nGlenn, can you please confirmed that you received this message\n1","truncated":false,"body_characters":4119}