{"operation":"document","citation":"21-0031","title":"Mid State Tank Co., Inc. — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2021-06-10","effective_on":null,"summary":"21-0031 response to Mid State Tank Co., Inc. concerning 173.66.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-21-0031.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-21-0031.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-21-0031","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/docs/standards-rulemaking/hazmat/interpretations/75181/210031.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nU.S. Department\nof Transportation\nPipeline and Hazardous\nMaterials Safety\nAdministration\n1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE\nWashington, DC 20590\nJune 10, 2021\nBrian Kidd\nAssociate Engineer\nMid State Tank Co., Inc.\n1357 Jonathan Creek Road\nSullivan, IL 61951\nReference No. 21-0031\nDear Mr. Kidd:\nThis letter is in response to your March 9, 2021, email requesting clarification of the Hazardous\nMaterials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180) applicable to cargo tanks. Specifically,\nyou ask about the use of Institute of Makers of Explosives Safety Library Publication No. 23\n(IME Standard 23) for a non-DOT specification cargo tank transporting “UN3375, Ammonium\nnitrate gel, 5.1, II.”\nWe have paraphrased and answered your questions as follows:\nQ1. You ask whether a hazardous material that is classified as an oxidizer qualifies for use\nunder IME Standard 23.\nA1. The answer is yes. Ammonium nitrate emulsions, ammonium nitrate suspensions, or\nammonium nitrate gels—classified as a Division 5.1 (Oxidizer) and that are precursor\nexplosives—may be transported under the provisions of IME Standard 23.\nQ2. You ask whether there are any tank design issues that would prevent the non-DOT\nspecification cargo tank described in your email from qualification in accordance with\nIME Standard 23.\nA2. This Office is unable to establish—within the scope of this request for an interpretation—\nwhether there are any design elements that would preclude the packaging you described\nfrom the use of IME Standard 23. This determination should be made by the person\ncertifying the packaging (e.g., design certifying engineer (DCE)) that it is compliant with\nIME Standard 23.\nQ3. You ask whether the markings required on the nameplate in accordance with the IME\nStandard 23 may list the maximum allowable working pressure (MAWP) and the\nmaximum design pressure as zero.\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\nA3. Non-specification bulk packagings are required to be marked with the MAWP as certified\nby the DCE in accordance with IME Standard 23 section (F)(3)(d). Indicating that the\ndetermined MAWP and the maximum design pressure is zero is not specifically\nprohibited by IME Standard 23 and there may be instances in which marking either as\nzero is appropriate.\nQ4. You ask which pressure testing procedure is required for the non-DOT specification\ncargo tank described in your email under IME Standard 23.\nA4. Unless the non-DOT specification cargo tank in question is a sift-proof closed vehicle or\na closed bulk bin, hydrostatic or pneumatic testing is required as specified in Appendix B,\nof IME Standard 23.\nQ5. You ask what additional steps would be required to ensure this non-DOT specification\ncargo tank conforms to IME Standard 23.\nA5. Non-DOT specification cargo tanks authorized for transport of certain explosives and\noxidizers under § 173.66 of the HMR must be qualified, maintained, and repaired in\naccordance with the provisions set forth in IME Standard 23, specifically, Appendix B.\nYou should consult a DCE—per Section I, Paragraph D of IME Standard 23—for\nadditional conformance requirements.\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\nFrom: INFOCNTR (PHMSA)\nTo: Hazmat Interps\nSubject: FW: IME SLP-23 interpretation research\nDate: Wednesday, March 24, 2021 2:39:24 PM\nAttachments: SLP-23 Email Drawing.pdf\nCasey\n21-0031\nHello,\nBelow and attached is a request for Letter of Interpretation.\nMailing Address:\nMid-State Tank Co., Inc.\n1357 Jonathan Creek Road\nSullivan, IL 61951\n217-728-8383\nThanks,\nJonathon, HMIC\nFrom: Brian Kidd [mailto:briank@midstatetank.com]\nSent: Tuesday, March 9, 2021 9:23 AM\nTo: INFOCNTR (PHMSA) <INFOCNTR.INFOCNTR@dot.gov>\nSubject: IME SLP-23 interpretation research\nCAUTION: This email originated from outside of the Department of Transportation (DOT). Do not click on links or\nopen attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.\nGood morning.\nWe have a customer that ordered and placed into service a non-DOT cargo vessel last year.\nUnknown to our organization, the customer utilized the vessel for transporting Ammonium\nnitrate gel (UN3375). The vessel was inspected by Joe Vega (PHMSA investigator, western\ndivision) and removed from service due to the lack of proper requirements for the product\nbeing transported.\nAccording to our customer, they were informed by Mr. Vega that the unit could possibly\nqualify for IME SLP-23 provisions. IME SLP-23 is not an area we are familiar with at this\ntime and was encouraged by Mr. Vega to contact the Hazardous Materials Info Center for\nadditional questions and interpretations.\nAttached is a copy of the production drawing for the vessel construction.\nThe original specification use for this non-DOT vessel:\nindustrial elliptical single compartment / design pressure 0 psi internal / 0 psi external / test\npressure 4 psi max.\nOriginal test procedure conducted:\n- fill vessel 80% +/- capacity with water\n\n<<<PAGE 4>>>\n\n- pressurize with air to 3 psi\n- check for leaks\nFrom our understanding, this vessel would need to follow retesting procedures by a qualified\nregistered inspector for proper documentation under SLP-23.\nFollowing are the questions we have:\n1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Does the product classification of an oxidizer qualify for SLP-23?\nAre there any tank design issues that would prevent this vessel from SLP-23?\nCan the data tags required for SLP-23 list the max allowable working pressure and the\nmax design pressure as zero?\nWhich pressure testing procedure would be correct for a non-DOT non-pressure vessel\nunder SLP-23?\nWhat additional steps would be required to conform this vessel to meet SLP-23?\nIf you have any questions, please let me know.\nThank you for your time.\nBrian Kidd\nAssociate Engineer\nMid State Tank Co., Inc.\nbriank@midstatetank.com\n217-728-8383 phone (ext. 312)\n217-728-8384 fax","truncated":false,"body_characters":5959}