{"operation":"document","citation":"98-0363","title":"National Tank Truck Carriers, Inc. — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"1999-01-19","effective_on":null,"summary":"98-0363 response to National Tank Truck Carriers, Inc. concerning 180.407.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-98-0363.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-98-0363.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-98-0363","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/1998/980363.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nU.S. Department\nof Transportation\n400 Seventh Street, S.W.\nWashington, D.C.\n20590\nResearch and\nSpecial Programs\nAdministration\nJAN 1 9 1999\nMr: Clifford J. Harvison, Jr.\nPresident\nRef. No.\n98-0363\nNational Tank Truck Carriers, Inc.\n2200 Mill Road\nAlexandria, VA 22314\nDear Mr. Harvison:\nThis\nresponds to your recent letter concerning certain cargo\ntank tests and inspections required under the Hazardous\nMaterials Regulations\n• (49 CFR Parts 171-180; HMR) •\nSpecifically, you ask about the elements of a pressure test\nand the procedures that should be followed if more than one\nfacility performs the inspections and testing.\nYour interpretation is correct.\nThe pressure test required by\n§ 180.407 (g) of the HMR is not considered complete until both\nthe external and internal inspections, as well as the pressure\ntest, have been completed.\nAn operator may use more than one\nfacility to perform the required inspections and testing. In\nthat event, as you have advised your members, the pressure\ntest marking required by $ 180.415 is applied to the cargo\ntank only when all inspection and testing requirements are\nfulfilled.\nFurther, the relevant documentation must indicate\nthat different facilities performed the external and internal\ninspections and the pressure test.\nUntil the inspection and\ntesting requirements are completed, the specification plate or\nthe cargo tank should be\ncovered.\nWe advise against removino\nthe specification plate in this\nsituation.\nI note the inform not neede to conta han\nSincerely,\nThoma. Allam\nThomas G. Allan\nSenior Iransportation Regulations Specialist\nOffice of Hazardous Materials Standards\n180.407\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\nNATIONAL TANK\nNTTC\nLUZMAI SAFET\nNATIONAL TANK\nTRIOCRS CARRIERS, INC.\nTRUCK CARRIERS\nTHE NATIONAL\nORGANIZATION\nTANK TRUCK INDUSTRY\nCLIFFORD J. HARVISON\nPRESIDENT\n2200 MILL ROAD • ALEXANDRIA, VA 22314-4677\nPHONE: 703/838-1960 - FAX: 703/684-5753\n98-0363\nNovember 24, 1998\nGorsky\nMr. Alan I. Roberts\nAssociate Administrator for\n§ 180.407\nHazardous Materials Safety\nResearch & Special Programs Administration\nU.S. Department of Transportation\nWashington, DC 20591\n(Via fax, hard copy to follow)\nDear Mr. Roberts:\nPlease consider this letter a request for interpretation regarding various tests and\ninspections of cargo tanks specified at 49 CFR 180.407 (g).\nThe regulatory provision, dealing with the pressure test, specifies (in part) that, \"(i) As\npart of the pressure test, the inspector must perform an internal and external visual\ninspection...\n\" (the exception for MC 338 cargo tanks is not relevant, here).\nlacomplying with this provision, a question is raised by the fast that some registered \"CI\nare equipped to perform external and internal inspections, but do not hold\nthemselves out to perform the pressure test (nor do they perform the pressure test).\nTherefore, for a carrier to comply, it is forced to use more than one CT facility to perform\nall three elements of the pressure test.\nNITC reads the regulation in the following context: That the pressure test is not\ncompleted (and the cargo tank may not be represented as being in compliance with the\nHMR) until all elements of the test/inspection regime (i.e. external visual inspection,\ninternal visual inspection and the pressure test) have been completed. In other words, a\ncarrier may use more than one CT facility to achieve compliance.\nFürthermore, and in such cases, we have counseled our members to take the following\nactions:\n-\n1) Once the cargo tank has been removed from service for the purpose of\ninspection and testing, the specification plate should be removed or covered;\n•\n\n<<<PAGE 3>>>\n\n2) No exterior markings (required by 49 CFR 180.415) should be affixed to the\ncargo tank until all three elements of the test/inspection regime have been\ncompleted; and,\n3) All relevant documentation should reflect the fact that different CT facilities\nperformed portions of the test/inspection regime.\nMr. Roberts, please advise whether or not NTT's interpretation (and our advice to our\nmembership in this matter) is correct.\nThank you for your consideration in this matter.\nVery truly yours,\nChifforă J. Harviso\nPresident","truncated":false,"body_characters":4155}