49 C.F.R. § 179.18

Thermal protection systems

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Performance standard. When the regulations in this subchapter require thermal protection on a tank car, the tank car must have sufficient thermal resistance so that there will be no release of any lading within the tank car, except release through the pressure release device, when subjected to:

(1) A pool fire for 100 minutes; and

(2) A torch fire for 30 minutes.

(b) Thermal analysis. (1) Compliance with the requirements of paragraph (a) of this section shall be verified by analyzing the fire effects on the entire surface of the tank car. The analysis must consider the fire effects on and heat flux through tank discontinuities, protective housings, underframes, metal jackets, insulation, and thermal protection. A complete record of each analysis shall be made, retained, and upon request, made available for inspection and copying by an authorized representative of the Department. The procedures outlined in “Temperatures, Pressures, and Liquid Levels of Tank Cars Engulfed in Fires,” DOT/FRA/OR&D-84/08.11, (1984), Federal Railroad Administration, Washington, DC (available from the National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA) shall be deemed acceptable for analyzing the fire effects on the entire surface of the tank car.

(2) When the analysis shows the thermal resistance of the tank car does not conform to paragraph (a) of this section, the thermal resistance of the tank car must be increased by using a system listed by the Department under paragraph (c) of this section or by testing a new or untried system and verifying it according to appendix B of this part.

(c) Systems that no longer require test verification. The Department maintains a list of thermal protection systems that comply with the requirements of appendix B of this part and that no longer require test verification. Information necessary to equip tank cars with one of these systems is available in the PHMSA Records Center, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, East Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.

[Amdt. 179-50, 60 FR 49077, Sept. 21, 1995, as amended by Amdt. 179-50, 61 FR 33256, June 26, 1996; 66 FR 45390, Aug. 28, 2001; 70 FR 56099, Sept. 23, 2005; 72 FR 55696, Oct. 1, 2007]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 1 case, 2011–2011 · leading case: Roth v. Norfalco LLC, 651 F.3d 367 (3rd Cir. 2011).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Roth v. Norfalco LLC, 651 F.3d 367 (3rd Cir. 2011). “49 C.F.R. § 179.18 . Modifications to the design features set forth in the HMR are prohibited absent written authorization from the DOT.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.