{"operation":"document","citation":"99-0136","title":"RNG Pro-Tech, Inc. — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2000-02-02","effective_on":null,"summary":"99-0136 response to RNG Pro-Tech, Inc. concerning 178.345.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-99-0136.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-99-0136.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-99-0136","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/1999/990136.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nf Transportatio\nS. Departmen\n400 Seventh Street, S.W.\nWashington. D.C. 20590\nResearch and\nIdministration\npecial Program:\nFEB 2 2000\nMr. Don Nelson\nQuality Assurance Manager\nRef. No. 99-0136\n1026 Western\nRNG Pro-Tech, Inc.\nP.O. Box 830\nDrive\nTOM OSO Canada\nCrossfield, Alberta\nDear Mr. Nelson:\nThis is in response to your letter dated May 27, 1999, concerning\ncargo tank motor vehicles under the Hazardous Materials\nthe factor of safety (FS) in the design of DOT specification\ninquire whether the FS reduction from 4:1 to 3.5:1, as authorized\nRegulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180). Specifically, you\nin the 1999 Addenda of the 1998 ASME Code, is permissible under\nthe HMR.\nThe answer is no.\nin § 178.337-3 allow for the maximum stress value prescribed in\nThe structural integrity requirements provided\nSection VIII of the ASME Code or 25 percent of the tensile\nstrength of the material used.\nreference the 1992 edition of the ASME Code with addenda through\nThe HMR currently incorporate by\nDecember 31, 1993, which mandates an FS of 4:1.\nIn a recently published notice of proposed rulemaking (Docket No.\nHM-218; 64 ER 53165; September 30, 1999), we proposed to\nincorporate by reference the 1998 edition of the ASME Code for\nSection VIII, Division I, without the 1999 addenda. This\nproposal will maintain the currently authorized FS of 4:1. Any\ntank motor vehicle must be approved under the terms of a DOT\ndeviation from this prescribed FS for a DOT specification cargo\nexemption.\nI trust this satisfies your inquiry. Please contact us if we can\nbe of further assistance.\nSincerely,\nHathe z. Mitchell\nHattie L. Mitchell\nChief, Regulatory Review and Reinvention\nOffice of Hazardous Materials Standards\n990136\n18365\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\nStevens\nRNG\n§ 178.345\nProTech\n1.0. Box 8830 Drive\nPhone: (403) 946-567\nCrossfield, Alberta TOM OSI\nFax:\n(403) 946-4358\nMay 27, 1999\n99-0136\nMr. Tom Allan\nDeputy Director\nOffice of Hazardous Materials\nU.S. Department of Transportation\nPhone: (202) 366-8553, Fax: (202) 366-3753\nRe: Vessels designed with 3.5 safety factor for transports\nDear Mr. Allan:\nI have just had a phone conversation with Mr. Ron Kirkpatrick of the Technology Division,\nregarding to my concerns as shown below.\nDepartment of Transportation. Mr. Kirkpatrick felt that you are the best person to talk to\nBased on the recent ASME Code Cases 2278, 2284 and 2290, the pressure vessels are\nallowed to be designed with a lower design safety factor of 3.5, versus the current factor of 4.0.\nRNG Pro-Tech Inc. is a manufacturer of pressure vessels and transports for hazardous\nmaterials such as LPG and NH3. We would like to know whether vessels designed per the\nCode Cases with a design safety factor of 3.5 are authorized for our transports per the Cargo\nSpecifications 51, 56 and 57.\ntank Hazardous Material Regulations MC331, MC338, MC406, MC407, MC412 and\nObviously, the use of a lower safety factor is very significant to our company and all the\ncompanies in this field. It will be greatly appreciated if we may have your response regarding to\nthis at your earliest convenience.\nLooking forward to hearing from you.\nTruly yours,\nLining Dal.\nPlant Manager","truncated":false,"body_characters":3166}