{"operation":"document","citation":"20-0039","title":"Rescar Companies — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2020-08-26","effective_on":null,"summary":"20-0039 response to Rescar Companies concerning 179.7.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-20-0039.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-20-0039.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-20-0039","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/docs/standards-rulemaking/hazmat/interpretations/74326/200039.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nU.S. Department\nof Transportation\nPipeline and Hazardous\nMaterials Safety\nAdministration\nSeptember 2, 2020\n1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE\nWashington, DC 20590\nJay Standish\nVice President of Quality Assurance\nRescar Companies\n1101 31st Street\nSuite 250\nDowners Grove, IL 60515\nReference No. 20-0039\nDear Mr. Standish:\nThis letter is in response to your March 10, 2020, letter requesting clarification of the Hazardous\nMaterials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180) applicable to the requirements for a quality\nassurance program (QAP).\nWe have paraphrased and answered your questions as follows:\nQ1. You ask what process(es) and standard(s) repair facilities’ QAPs need to include in order\nto comply with the “critical to quality” inspection criteria being applied.\nA1. The HMR does not define the term “critical to quality.” However, § 179.7 requires tank\ncar facilities to have a QAP approved by the Association of American Railroads (AAR).\nSpecifically, § 179.7(b)(5) requires that a QAP must have a description of the\nmanufacturing, repair, inspection, testing, and qualification or maintenance program,\nincluding the acceptance criteria, so that an inspector can identify the characteristics of\nthe tank car and the elements to inspect, examine, and test at each point.\nDue to the diverse nature of activities related to the qualification of a tank car for service,\nPHMSA cannot qualify a specific standard or process as conforming to the performance\nstandard of § 179.7(b)(5) through a letter of interpretation. The determination of whether\na QAP meets the requirements of § 179.7 considers all the specific actions the tank car\nfacility is responsible for performing to qualify the tank car for service. In general,\nacceptance criteria must include the characteristics of the tank car and the elements to\ninspect, examine, and test at each point. This includes tank car fabrication and\nconstruction materials, and service equipment intended for installation onto a tank car,\nwhich must be inspected, examined and tested in accordance with a tank car facility’s\nQAP (see § 179.7(b)(4)).\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\nThe approval of QAPs, including this quality assurance element, is done in accordance\nwith the AAR’s Manual of Standards and Recommended Practices, Section J,\nSpecification for Quality Assurance, M-1003.\nQ2. You ask whether all the activities set forth in the AAR Manual of Standards and\nRecommended Practices, Section C- III, Specifications for Tank Cars, M-1002, in\nAppendix B, section 3.1.6.12, are required to be performed by a tank car facility.\nA2. Any person who engages in the qualification of a tank car meets the definition of a “tank\ncar facility” and is subject to all applicable regulations. Note that the AAR revised its\nManual of Standards and Recommended Practices, Section C-III, Specifications for Tank\nCars, M-1002, Appendix B on December 19, 2019, to align with this position as\nreflected in PHMSA’s October 8, 2019, Letter of Interpretation to the Railway Supply\nInstitute (Reference No. 19-0117).\nI hope this information is helpful. Please contact us if we can be of further assistance.\nSincerely,\nDirk Der Kinderen\nChief, Standards Development Branch\nStandards and Rulemaking Division\n\n<<<PAGE 3>>>\n\nCiccarone\n20-0039\nFrom: INFOCNTR (PHMSA)\nTo: Hazmat Interps\nSubject: FW: Request for Formal Interpretation\nDate: Tuesday, March 10, 2020 2:47:30 PM\nAttachments: PHMSA Letter of Interpretation 03.10.20.pdf\nimage001.png\nHello Alice and Ikeya,\nPlease see attached for letter of interpretation request.\nThank you,\nKathryn (HMIC)\nFrom: Jay Standish [mailto:standish@rescar.com]\nSent: Tuesday, March 10, 2020 2:34 PM\nTo: PHMSA HM InfoCenter <PHMSAHMInfoCenter@dot.gov>\nCc: Susan Schieszler <sschieszler@rescar.com>; Andy Schaffer <aschaffer@rescar.com>; Dan\nMadock <madock@rescar.com>\nSubject: Request for Formal Interpretation\nMr. Kelley:\nGood afternoon. Rescar Companies (Rescar) is requesting a formal letter of interpretation\nregarding how the term “Critical to Quality Characteristics,” is to be interpreted and applied to\nRescar’s incoming inspection of tank car components process in its Quality Assurance\nProgram under 49 CFR § 179.7 (b) (5) and how PHMSA interprets the Exception to M-1002\nTechnical Approval Requirements in the newly adopted Appendix B, specifically the\nException noted at 3.1.6.12.\nBackground and details for this request are contained in the attached letter formalizing the\nrequest for interpretation.\nRescar thanks you for your time and consideration of this matter.\nSincerely,\nJay G Standish","truncated":false,"body_characters":4558}