{"operation":"document","citation":"22-0132","title":"The Hartford Steam Boiler Inspection and Insurance Company — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2023-04-25","effective_on":null,"summary":"22-0132 response to The Hartford Steam Boiler Inspection and Insurance Company concerning 178.74, 178.75.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-22-0132.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-22-0132.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-22-0132","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/docs/standards-rulemaking/hazmat/interpretations/77541/220132.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nU.S. Department\nof Transportation\nPipeline and Hazardous\nMaterials Safety\nAdministration\n1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE\nWashington, DC 20590\nApril 25, 2023\nBruce K. Redfield\nField Service Manager\nThe Hartford Steam Boiler Inspection and Insurance Company\nOne State Street\nP.O. Box 299\nHartford, CT 06141-0299\nReference No. 22-0132\nDear Mr. Redfield:\nThis letter is in response to your December 8, 2022, letter requesting clarification of the\nHazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180) applicable to multiple element\ngas containers (MEGCs). You provide a scenario where an originally-contracted approval\nagency (AA), one that is approved by the Office of Hazardous Materials Safety Associate\nAdministrator, completed the review process for a new MEGC design type approval, prototype\ntesting, and witnessed testing—as required by § 178.74—but then the MEGC manufacturer\ndecided to change to a new AA. Specifically, you inquire whether the HMR allows for such a\nchange in the MEGC design type approval process.\nWe have paraphrased and answered your questions as follows:\nQ1. With respect to the § 178.74(b) requirement for an AA to review all drawings and\ncalculations, you ask whether the HMR allows for a new AA to review a previous AA’s\nMEGC design review work and adopt or reapprove the original MEGC design review\nand taking full responsibility (emphasis added) for the previous AA’s work.\nA1. The answer is yes. Section 178.74(c) states that the AA is responsible for ensuring that\nthe MEGC conforms to the design type approval and provides additional MEGC design\ntype approval requirements. This section does not restrict an AA from reviewing and\nreapproving a previous MEGC design type, provided that the AA takes full\nresponsibility.\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\nQ2. You ask whether the HMR allows for the new AA to review the MEGC prototype testing\nprescribed in §§ 178.74 and 178.75 and taking full responsibility (emphasis added) for\nthe previous AA’s work.\nA2. See answer A1.\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\nCardez\nFrom: INFOCNTR (PHMSA)\nTo: Dodd, Alice (PHMSA)\nCc: Hazmat Interps\nSubject: FW: Interpretation Request, 49 CFR Part 178.74 and 178.75\nDate: Monday, December 12, 2022 3:45:10 PM\nAttachments: HSB Interpretation Request 49 CFR Part 178.74 178.75 MEGC Inquiry 12-08-2022 .pdf\n22-0132\nHi Alice,\nPlease see the attached interpretation request.\nLet us know if you need anything else.\nRegards,\n-Breanna\nFrom: Redfield Bruce - Hartford-Remote-HSB <bruce_redfield@hsb.com>\nSent: Thursday, December 8, 2022 7:39 PM\nTo: INFOCNTR (PHMSA) <INFOCNTR.INFOCNTR@dot.gov>\nSubject: Interpretation Request, 49 CFR Part 178.74 and 178.75\nCAUTION: This email originated from outside of the Department of Transportation (DOT). Do\nnot click on links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content\nis safe.\nPlease see the attached Interpretation Request regarding 49 CFR Part 178.74 and 178.75.\nIf there are any questions, please feel free to contact me at 315-530-0185 or via e-mail\nbruce_redfield@hsb.com\nWith best regards,\nBruce Redfield\nFSM DOT / TC, Codes & Standards\nThe Hartford Steam Boiler\nInspection and Insurance Company\nOne State Street\nP.O. Box 5024\nHartford, CT 06102-5024\nTelephone: +1 (315) 530-0185\nbruce_redfield@hsb.com\nIMPORTANT NOTICE:\nThis email (including any attachments) contains confidential and proprietary information that is intended only for the\nindividual or entity designated above. If you are not the intended recipient, please be aware that any use, review, distribution,\nreproduction, copying, or action taken in reliance upon this email is strictly prohibited. If you received this email in error,\nplease notify the sender immediately, and permanently delete and destroy this email and any hard and electronic copies\nthereof. Although we have taken reasonable precautions to reduce the risk of transmitting software viruses, it is the\nresponsibility of the recipient to ensure that this email is virus-free. The Hartford Steam Boiler Inspection and Insurance\nCompany (including its subsidiaries and affiliates) disclaims any and all liability for any loss or damage caused by this email\nwhether due to viruses, interference, interception, data corruption, unapproved access, misrepresentation, or otherwise.\n\n<<<PAGE 4>>>\n\nIMPORTANT NOTICE:\nThis email (including any attachments) contains confidential and proprietary information that is intended only for the individual or entity\ndesignated above. If you are not the intended recipient, please be aware that any use, review, distribution, reproduction, copying, or\naction taken in reliance upon this email is strictly prohibited. If you received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately, and\npermanently delete and destroy this email and any hard and electronic copies thereof. Although we have taken reasonable precautions to\nreduce the risk of transmitting software viruses, it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that this email is virus-free. The Hartford\nSteam Boiler Inspection and Insurance Company (including its subsidiaries and affiliates) disclaims any and all liability for any loss or\ndamage caused by this email whether due to viruses, interference, interception, data corruption, unapproved access, misrepresentation,\nor otherwise.\n\n<<<PAGE 5>>>\n\nDecember 8, 2022\nMr. Shane Kelley\nDirector, Standards and Rulemaking Division\nU.S. DOT/PHMSA (PHH-10)\n1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE East Building, 2nd Floor\nWashington, DC 20590\nReference: 49 CFR Part 178.74 / 178.75 Interpretation Request\nDear Mr. Kelly,\nWe are requesting a written interpretation concerning the allowable design acceptance / approval,\nand prototype testing results under the following scenario:\nThe scenario:\nThe original contracted DAA completed the process of design review (178.74(b), prototype testing,\nwitness and acceptance (178.74(c)(1) and then the manufacturer initiated a change to another DAA.\nQuestion 1: In accordance with 49 CFR Part 178.74(b) the statement made on design type approval\ninclusive of all drawings and calculations is noted as a “must” review. In a case where the previous\nDAA completed the process of design review, would it be acceptable for the new DAA to review and\napprove the previous DAA Design, adopting or re-approving the design and taking full responsibility\nfor the previous DAA Design Review?\nQuestion 2: Similar to the question above, would it be acceptable if the new DAA were to review,\nadopt or re-approve the MEGC prototype testing noted in 49 CFR Part 178.74 and 178.75 taking full\nresponsibility for the previous DAA testing results and supporting testing documentation?\nPlease contact us if you have any further questions.\nSincerely,\nBruce K. Redfield\nField Services Manager – DOT/TC\nPh: 315-530-0185\nE-mail: bruce_redfield@hsb.com\nThe Hartford Steam Boiler Inspection and Insurance Company\nPage 1 of 1","truncated":false,"body_characters":7056}