{"operation":"document","citation":"98-0587","title":"Baltimore Cargo Tank Services, Inc. — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"1998-03-19","effective_on":null,"summary":"98-0587 response to Baltimore Cargo Tank Services, Inc. concerning 180.413.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-98-0587.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-98-0587.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-98-0587","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/1998/980587.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nU.S. Department\nof Transportation\nWashington, D.C.\n400 Seventh Street, S.W.\n20590\nResearch and\nSpecial Programs\nAdministration\nMAR 1 9 1998\nMr. Roy N. Clark\nBaltimore Cargo Tank Services, Inc.\n1836-B Chesapeake Avenue\nBaltimore, MD 21226\nDear Mr. Clark:\nThis is in response to your letter requesting clarification of requirements specified in 49 CFR\n180.413(d)(1) concerning modifications of a cargo tank motor vehicle. Specifically, you ask if\nthe use of a Design Certifying Engineer (DCE) is required to certify an MC 306 AL cargo tank\nwhen double bulkheads and void spaces are added. You also asked what type of documentation\nwould be required.\nBy definition in §178.320(a), the modified cargo tank would be a new design type by virtue of\nthe fact that your proposed changes would require different engineering drawings and\n1.04\ncalculations from the original design, see §178.320(a)(3) under \"Design type.\" While it is true\nthat the addition of heads to create double bulkheads, where the original design provided only\nsingle bulkheads, could be expected to reduce the loads imposed on the cargo tank and, thus,\nwould not adversely affect structural integrity, other effects, such as changes in the distribution\nof forces, also should be evaluated by the DCE.\nThe Hazardous Materials Regulations prescribes the type of information that must be included in\nthe DCE's certification but not any particular type of form. The person doing the modification\nand a Registered Inspector must certify that the cargo tank conforms with § 180.413 and the\napplicable specification by issuing a supplemental manufacturer's certificate. Once the DCE has\napproved the modification according to § 180.413, the approval would be applicable to other\ncargo tanks that are substantially the same as the initial modified cargo tank.\n!\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\n:\nIn your letter, you also asked about a possible change to the wording of § 178.345-3(F)(3) to\nrequire that any pad used for welding an appurtenance to a cargo tank must be equipped with an\nopening for drainage purposes. We will consider your comments for possible inclusion in a\nfuture rulemaking action.\nIf we can be of further assistance, please contact us.\nSincerely,\nHatter mitchelo\nHattie L. Mitchell, Chief\nRegulatory Review and Reinvention\nOffice of Hazardous Materials Standards\n\n<<<PAGE 3>>>\n\nI Karen\nFile: 180.413\nSa 333,\nBaltimore Cargo Tank Services, Inc.\nphone\n1836-B Chesapeake Avenue\nfax\n(410) 355-7035\nBaltimore, Maryland 21226\n(410) 355-6989\nJune 16, 1997\n8/14/57\nAssociate Administrator of Hazardous Materials Safety\n2 erecks\nResearch and Special Programs Administration\n400 7th Street SW\nWashington D.C. 20590\nATTN: Office of Hazardous Material Standards\nRE: Request for interpretation or clarification in 49 CFR 180.413 (d)(1). Request for rewording in or\ndefinition in 49 CFR 178.45...\nMs.,\nmore Cargo Tank Services, Inc. is a commercial cargo tank service facility registered with the\nto inspect, test, repair and modify MC/DOT specification cargo tanks.\nQUESTION 1:\nSeveral months ago (3-1997) I was asked by one of our customers if we could (would) change some\nof their existing late model (1994 and 1995) MC 306 AL cargo tanks so that there will be double\nbulkheads and a void space between the two rearmost compartments. This customer's more recently\npurchased tanks were built with these double bulkheads and void spaces.\nMost of the people in the cargo tank industry (manufacturers, Design Certifying Engineers,\ngovernment officials and representatives from other repair shops) with whom I have discussed this\nmatter, referred me to 49 CFR 180.413 (d)(1) and said that I would need a Design Certifying Engineer\nto make and sign engineering papers (calculations, drawings, etc.) for this modification.\nIn a telephone conversation (4-1997) with Danny Swift (FHWA/OMC) and Ron Kirkpatrick (RSPA),\nthis modification was discussed and it was determined that: this modification could be made; a Design\nCertifying Engineer would be needed; the tank could be \"recertified\" as an MC 306 AL.\nring to finalize (find a suitable Design Certifying Engineer and to establish a working relationship\ncen him, the manufacturer, my customer and myself) the preliminaries for this modification so\nthat I can give my customer an accurate estimate, a strong and valid point was raised by several\npeople.\n\n<<<PAGE 4>>>\n\nBaltimore Cargo Tank Services, Inc.\nphone\n1836-B Chesapeake Avenue\nfax\n(410) 355-7035\nBaltimore, Maryland 21226\n(410) 355-6989\n49 CFR 180.413 (d)(1) states that the approval of a Design Certifying Engineer is required if the\nmodification will result in a \"design type\" change. This modification will change the tank from it's\noriginal construction, but is within the manufacturer's \"design type\" for this tank.\n' It is my understanding that most manufacturers do not do full blown engineering papers for each tank\nproduced if it is made within one of their already engineered designs.\nThough this modification is more involved, it does not change this tank's \"design type\" anymore than\nadding an auxiliary fill, clean out opening or extra emergency valve would.\nIs a Design Certifying Engineer needed for the modification?\nWhat documentation is required when a modification must be \"approved by a Design Certifying\nneer?\nQUESTION 2\nThe use, description and requirements for pads attached to the cargo tank shell are in 49 CFR 178.345-\n3 (f)(3). This section only pertains to appurtenances.\nWe have experienced tanks built with pads that do not have weep holes or gaps for draining when the\nattachments to these pads provides structural support for the cargo tank. Examples of these\nattachments are frame members, outriggers, cross members and bolsters.\nA pad, irregardless of it's use, should have an opening for drainage.\nCan wording to this affect be added to 49 CFR 178.345 somewhere?\nWhen I presented these points to Danny Swift last week, he suggested that I request in writing to you\nfor some guidance.\nThank you,\nRanClark\nRoy N. Clark\n\n<<<PAGE 5>>>\n\n....\nBaltimore Cargo Tank Services, Inc\n1836-B Chesapeake Avenue\nBaltimore, MD. 21226\nAssociate Adm\nResearch and S\n400 Ith Street\nWashington D.\nATn: Ofti\nice of","truncated":false,"body_characters":6190}