Skip to main content

OOSC, Part III, Item 3. Bulk Packages e. Bulk Package Integrity - Leaking Piping

Entry DateSeptember 1, 2006
Issue Number06-026-HAZ
NameCapt. Charles R. Teasdale
AgencyWisconsin State Patrol - Motor Carrier Enforcement Section / Bureau of Transportation Safety
Address4802 Sheboygan Avenue, Room 551Madison, WI, 53707United StatesMap It (opens in a new tab)
Phone(608) 266-0305
Fax(608) 267-9600
Email[email protected]
CommitteeHazardous Materials Committee
StatusClosed
Summary of Issue

I will be sending three pictures of cargo tanks which transport gasoline blended with ethanol via emial. In each of the pictures there is \"leakage\" where the tank connects to the section of pipe containing the internal valve. This connection contains a cork gasket impregnated with rubber. Both industry and enforcement agree that the HM product (gasoline) being transported is exterior to the package, i.e. the tank, at this point. Industry maintains that this is not a \"leak\". Industry contends that as the gasoline comes in contact with the cork gasket inside the tank, some of the gasoline is absorbed by the cork and migrates through the cork gasket thus becoming exposed to the exterior environment. Industry describes the cork gasket as being saturated but not leaking because the product does not \"drip\" or \"flow\" from this area. The position of the Wisconsin State Patrol is that the HM/DG product is present exterior to the tank (package) and therefore is \"leaking\".

Justification or Need

Industry states that this condition has not been identified as a defect by the surrounding jurisdictions. The Wisconsin State Patrol has discussed this issue with the the Wisconsin Division office of the FMCSA and the cargo tanks are currently being placed Out-of-Service following established in Part III of the North American Standard Out-of-Service Criteria (OOSC), 3. Bulk Packages, e. Bulk Package Integrity \"Hazardous materials leaking from a bulk package (including associated piping) constitutes an OOS condition.

Request for Action

Please provide an interpretation as to whether or not this condition constitutes a \"leak\" and therefore meets the OOS condition noted in the OOSC.