{"operation":"document","citation":"PI-83-006","title":"CIBA - GEIGY Pipe Systems — Pipeline Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"1983-04-11","effective_on":null,"summary":"PI-83-006 response to CIBA - GEIGY Pipe Systems concerning 192.281.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-pi-83-006.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-pi-83-006.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-pi-83-006","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/Pipeline/1983/PI83006.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nApril 11, 1983\nMr. Philip K. Gilbert\nCIBA - GEIGY Pipe Systems\nSuite 190\n7676 Hillmont\nHouston, TX 77040\nDear Mr. Gilbert:\nA formal interpretation of 49 CFR §192.281, Plastic pipe, paragraph (a) as requested by your\nletter of March 23, 1983, is enclosed.\nSincerely,\nRichard L. Beam\nAssociate Director for\nPipeline Safety Regulation\nMaterials Transportation Bureau\nEnclosure\ndal\\192\\281\\83-04-11\n1\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\nNo. 83-3\nDate: April 11, 1983\nDEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION\nRESEARCH AND SPECIAL PROGRAMS ADMINISTRATION\nMATERIALS TRANSPORTATION BUREAU\n______________________________________________________________________________\nPIPELINES SAFETY REGULATORY INTERPRETATION\n______________________________________________________________________________\nNote: This pipeline safety regulatory interpretation applies\na particular rule to a particular set of facts and\ncircumstances, and as such, is binding only on the\noperator to whom the interpretation is specifically\naddresses.\nSECTION: 192.281\nSUBJECT: FACTS: None.\nJoining plastic pipe with a plastic mechanical fitting that is threaded to provide\ngasket pressure.\nQUESTION: Would DOT consider the CIBA-GEIGY Pronto-Lock, Pronto-Lock II, and\nPronto-Lock III mechanical coupling systems as threaded joints or as mechanical joints?\nINTERPRETATION: The Pronto-Lock, Pronto-Lock II, and Pronto-Lock III mechanical\ncoupling systems are \"mechanical joints\" and would not be considered as \"threaded joints\" which\nare prohibited under §192.281(a).\nThe threaded portions of these joints are used to apply compressive stress to a gasket or O-ring\nseal similar to many other joint systems now used in gas piping systems. Threads are designed to\nminimize stresses and are not used as a gas seal.\nRichard L. Beam\nAssociate Director for\nPipeline Safety Regulation\nMaterials Transportation Bureau\ndal\\192\\281\\83-04-11\n2\n\n<<<PAGE 3>>>\n\nMarch 23, 1983\nMr. Richard L. Beam\nAssoc. Director for Pipeline Safety Regulations\nMaterial Transportation Bureau\nDepartment of Transportation\nWashington, D.C. 20590\nRef: Title 49 Of The Code Of Federal Regulations Interpretation Of Part 192, Section 192.281\nDear Mr. Beam:\nThis letter is a formal request for written interpretation of the referenced section. The question\nhas been raised whether the D.O.T. would classify our Pronto-Lock®, Pronto Lock II, or Pronto-\nLock III mechanical coupling systems (see enclosed literature) as a \"threaded joint\" or a\n\"mechanical joint\".\nIn recent telephone conversations with Mr. Paul Cory of your department, he indicated that since\nthe seal was effected by an \"O\"-ring instead of the threads, the coupling systems would be\nconsidered mechanical coupling systems. We did not discuss the Pronto-Lock III coupling system\nbut it seals by a lip seal gasket and not by thread interference.\nIf you have any questions, or would like to see actual joint samples, I would be pleased to help in\nany way I can.\nThank you for handling this matter and I look forward to hearing from you soon.\nSincerely,\nPhilip K. Gilbert\nEngineer\ndal\\192\\281\\83-04-11\n3","truncated":false,"body_characters":3065}