Tank failing Visual, shop condemned the tank?

[lowviz]

No ...//... Not unless they happen to be an authorized hydrotesting facility as well.

Most excellent!

Since we have somehow managed to show that there is disagreement as to condemning a cylinder even at the agency level, your statement above (even if unsubstantiated) is gold.

Should I ever need to take one of my tanks in for VIP the first thing that I will do is to ask if it will be VIP'd by a licensed hydro test facility. If the answer is 'No We will VIP your tank here' (and they are not a requalifier) then they will be politely reminded that they cannot condemn my cylinder in any fashion if it fails their VIP. And they were fore-warned.

Thank you.

 

[loosenit2]

Here is the PSI/PCI Visual Inspection Release Form that they encourage their testers to utilize in order to correctly remove condemned cylinders from service.
PSI-PCI - Visual Inspection Release Form

You may have just introduced another term into this thread. The form you loaded is a customer consent to have a tank “conspicuously disabled”. What does that mean? What is the difference between conspicuously disabled and condemned?

I would think that returning the tank with the valve off would met the definition of conspicuously disabled.

 

[JackD342]

You may have just introduced another term into this thread. The form you loaded is a customer consent to have a tank “conspicuously disabled”. What does that mean? What is the difference between conspicuously disabled and condemned?

I would think that returning the tank with the valve off would met the definition of conspicuously disabled.

No.
You are taking a phrase out of context, and need to read the complete document, specifically the earlier paragraph that includes:
"After required codes and threads have been obliterated, as a conspicuous disabling measure, the cylinder and valve will be returned to you."

 

[loosenit2]

No.
You are taking a phrase out of context, and need to read the complete document, specifically the earlier paragraph that includes:
"After required codes and threads have been obliterated, as a conspicuous disabling measure, the cylinder and valve will be returned to you."

I see the language now. I’ve gotten My tanks inspected by multiple PSI inspectors, have never had one ask me to sign a form like that. Will have to make sure that I never use a shop that requires that kind of a consent as a condition of doing a visual inspection.

 

[rjack321]

Most excellent!

Since we have somehow managed to show that there is disagreement as to condemning a cylinder even at the agency level, your statement above (even if unsubstantiated) is gold.

Should I ever need to take one of my tanks in for VIP the first thing that I will do is to ask if it will be VIP'd by a licensed hydro test facility. If the answer is 'No We will VIP your tank here' (and they are not a requalifier) then they will be politely reminded that they cannot condemn my cylinder in any fashion if it fails their VIP. And they were fore-warned.

Thank you.

I am only a PSI trained inspector for 12 years so I don't have the force of law - and I only VIP tanks for me and my friends for free.

But if you brought me a cylinder as a customer and said I couldn't condemn it if it failed I would give it back to you and tell you to take it elsewhere. While it is totally legal to shop around until you find a visual inspector willing to pass your tank, I don't want to be a part of that nonsense.

 

[NAM001]

No
Not unless they happen to be an authorized hydrotesting facility as well.

Taking a VIP course from PSI, TDI, UTD, ANDI or anyone else does not authorize you to deface or damage anyone's property, cylinders, regs, cars, trucks, or houses. Without explicit authorization from the owner you are vandalizing their stuff.

Captain I agree with you. The only issue with that is, I read somewhere in this thread that neither a requalifier or an inspector is allowed to render a tank unusable. hydro guys are requalifiers and the vis folks are inspectors. IMO a requalifier should have the authourity invested by their license to destroy a tank or refuse to return a failed tank to the owner. I would have to read again but it may have said that they can refuse to return a defective tank to the owner.

It may be splitting hairs but a civiilian can not arrest any one they can detain them until an officer of the law arrives that has arrest powers but that is all. Until I read that cfr passage in this thread I thought requalifiers had destruction authority. I knew inspectors did not though.

 

[rjack321]

Captain I agree with you. The only issue with that is, I read somewhere in this thread that neither a requalifier or an inspector is allowed to render a tank unusable.

That's right

Nobody is authorized to destroy threads or drill holes
requalifiers are only authorized to XXXXX out the DOT numbers
scuba trained visual inspectors are not authorized (unless the owner signs something like the PSI form) to do even do XXXXs

I'm glad I only VIP my own and a few friend's tanks

 

[NAM001]

That's right

Nobody is authorized to destroy threads or drill holes
requalifiers are only authorized to XXXXX out the DOT numbers
scuba trained visual inspectors are not authorized (unless the owner signs something like the PSI form) to do even do XXXXs

I'm glad I only VIP my own and a few friend's tanks

I think you are right about that. they can mark it with XXX but they can not make it unusable. they can make it administratively useless but not physically useless. The XXXX on the tanks does nothing to make it not hold pressure but raises a flag just like using a sharpie to write condemned, only in a permanent fashion. I think that is fair to do it that way also. And again IMO that is the general rule for all tanks not just scuba tanks. You probably got that from cfr 49 dealing with primarily commercial tanks. The section dealing with retesting I would guess does not deliniate or give room to deliniate between commercial or non commercial by using wording like all tanks that are involved in transport etc are subject under cfr 49. Probably says ALL or ANY vessels are subject to this subsection which then includes non commercial vessels as well as commercial. I knew there was something speciial reagarding requalifers that inspectors could not do.

Thanks

 

[lowviz]

I am only a PSI trained inspector for 12 years so I don't have the force of law - and I only VIP tanks for me and my friends for free.

I only inspect my own tanks and I went through that training just to protect them from an over-zealous underinformed VIP tester. A lot of my old steels are hard to replace.

But if you brought me a cylinder as a customer and said I couldn't condemn it if it failed I would give it back to you and tell you to take it elsewhere. While it is totally legal to shop around until you find a visual inspector willing to pass your tank, I don't want to be a part of that nonsense.

You have a different perspective on this as you were trained and re-certed by PSI. They (PSI) have an extremely comprehensive training program and it is, therefore, most unlikely that you would improperly condemn (as opposed to reject) a tank. I don't want to be wearing a dangerous tank as I have seen what they can do, so no problem there.

I now have no idea as to who would actually perform the VIP's on my tanks as my old shop is now closed. So, yes, shopping around for a proper inspector would be an option that I would have wanted. Solved that for myself by becoming an agency-certified inspector.

I have no desire to inspect anyone else's cylinders. And this thread is what I will quote as an answer if someone asks me to do them a favor...

 

[JackD342]

Nobody is authorized to destroy threads or drill holes
requalifiers are only authorized to XXXXX out the DOT numbers
scuba trained visual inspectors are not authorized (unless the owner signs something like the PSI form) to do even do XXXXs

Yes. You beat me to it. The XXXXX is sufficient to consider the cylinder irreversibly condemned, even though someone can still ignore it and fill it regardless. Which is then a different legal rabbit hole to jump down for that filler.

I see the language now. I’ve gotten My tanks inspected by multiple PSI inspectors, have never had one ask me to sign a form like that. Will have to make sure that I never use a shop that requires that kind of a consent as a condition of doing a visual inspection.

On the flip side, this conversation is reminding me to utilize that form. I have rarely condemned a tank that was not my own, and the conversations with the owner before X'ing out the SN were always reasonable and productive, but I do NOT want to be in the situation where I return a cylinder to a customer that I am confident should not be in service without the condemnation marking. Aside from just being the morally right thing to do, one could theoretically make a case that if that resulted in an incident somewhere down the road I could be blamed for not having initially procured the permission to to do my job.

Now, I do have it easy regarding VIPs. Not only is my shop not very busy, but almost everything that goes through my shop is aluminum and not steel. Then even the steel is being used locally in fresh water and not salt. Frankly, I have yet to find a pit to measure, so have not had to decide if it is too deep or not.