Cave Fills on LP tanks

[2airishuman]

The legality isn’t up for debate

It is only unlawful if the cylinders so filled are transported in commerce.

 

[tomfcrist]

It is only unlawful if the cylinders so filled are transported in commerce.

Thus the chapters of the CFR he quoted refer to Labor, postal, and transportation

 

[BRT]

The legality isn’t up for debate. This is from a post I made back in February. I am not arguing that the law makes sense just that it exists.

So recommending someone get lo cylinders and over fill them is:
1. Bad advice if you don’t have a source for the fills.
2. Advice to do something that is illegal.

I have four lp85s and they are my preferred cylinders. If I need more gas then I have a set of 100s. I fully understand there are several of you doing dives that require a s$@t ton of gas. You are big boys and can make your own decisions.

@Caveeagle - I didn’t say cylinders were exploding. I said we don’t know when they will. Can we agree to not give the general diving community the green light to find out?

39 CFR - Postal Service

49 CFR 180.205 - General requirements for requalification of specification cylinders


49 CFR 178 - SPECIFICATIONS FOR PACKAGINGS

49 CFR 173.302 - Filling of cylinders with nonliquefied (permanent) compressed gases or adsorbed gases.

Says nothing about 10% overfill

 

[rjack321]

This exact same thread comes up roughly every 2 years. There have not been any steel LP scuba tank explosions in "cave fill" country in a decade plus.

Aluminums, many booms
LP steel, does not seem to be an explosion hazard whatsoever
Legality, there have been exactly ZERO "tickets" and/or citations written for overfilling lp scuba cylinders

 

[Diver-Drex]

The CFR absolutely applies to SCUBA cylinders in the US. The DOT has jurisdiction over them as clearly evidenced by the DOT stamping on cylinders. The permit and specification under which all SCUBA cylinders are produced is issued by the DOT.

I listed 39 CFR 183.115 and 29 CFR 1910.1200 as each defines compressed gas over 40psi as hazardous. That was I believe the specific question I was addressing, that compressed air isn’t a hazardous material. Not surprisingly 49 CFR Chapter 1 Subpart G has the same exact definition.

The requirements for overfilling a 3AA cylinder are indeed in 173.302. 173.302a to be more specific.

 

[tomfcrist]

The CFR absolutely applies to SCUBA cylinders in the US. The DOT has jurisdiction over them as clearly evidenced by the DOT stamping on cylinders. The permit and specification under which all SCUBA cylinders are produced is issued by the DOT.

You are confusing commercial regulation with actual law. The CFRs that you posted are only applicable if you have employees, mail a cylinder, or transport them commercially.

There is no law restricting ME from having my own fill system, never hydroing or doing a vis on a tank, and pumping LP cylinders to 4K all day every day. Thus it’s not illegal.

 

[NAM001]

Outside of the US, these matters seem to be pretty different. In the US, the "LP" tanks being discussed here are rated for ~180bar and being filled to ~245bar.

The reason for the ratings has less to do with design and engineering than it does Government regulations. This was per a rep for one of the major manufacturers.

I have also read posts regarding this that said overseas tanks use a a slightly different alloy in the steel tanks and that it was not simply a regulation problem or safety factor of 3 or 2.5 compared toe the us of 4.

 

[NAM001]

The pandora's box has been just opened. Let me get the popcorn adn a dr pepper.

the debate of what is commercial vs proivate or recreational

xportation, operation, or usage of

 

[Diver-Drex]

You are confusing commercial regulation with actual law. The CFRs that you posted are only applicable if you have employees, mail a cylinder, or transport them commercially.

There is no law restricting ME from having my own fill system, never hydroing or doing a vis on a tank, and pumping LP cylinders to 4K all day every day. Thus it’s not illegal.

Not confusing the two. I took it as a given that we are talking about someone needing to pay someone to overfill the cylinder. Or as was stated by someone there are rental fleets in cave country with overfilled cylinders.

Federal Regulations are law. If the law doesn’t apply to your situation it doesn’t mean it’s not a law.

 

[tomfcrist]

Federal Regulations are law. If the law doesn’t apply to your situation it doesn’t mean it’s not a law.

Law and legality are two separate issues.
When a law only applies to certain situations, it’s regulation.

Punching someone in the face and then breaking their arm is assault in most situations...thus it is illegal.....unless you are engaged in an mma match.

Whether we like it or disagree with it it is illegal to defeat the over pressure device and overfill cylinders.

Can you at least openly concede that the above statement is only true under certain caveats? And only in the USA?