Tank that has been engraved

[Arkman]

I don't know very much about the rules of tank inspection but I'm wondering about the comment that he had to pay $25 to get the tank back. I'd assume, it was like my LDS when I brought my old aluminum tanks in. He took one look and said he couldn't/wouldn't hydro them because he knew they were one of the bad alloy tanks. Of course he didn't charge me because he didn't do the hydro or inspection.

Now, I'd assume, if this LDS took a look at the tank and saw the markings he'd just say no. In that case I'd like to know what that $25 is for. If he did the visual then found the markings I suppose its fair to say he did work and should be paid. I'd also assume that doing a visual the first thing you'd do is look for "obvious" flaws. In this case you'd see the engraved flower and, if it were me, apologize and return the tank. Since it only would take a matter of seconds to do this I'd not charge.

I'd like to hear more of the reason for the charge, because to me it sounds unfair and I'd fight it.

 

[KVDIVR]

I think the problem is 49 CFR 178.35(f)(6) "Other markings are authorized provided they are made in low stress areas other than the side wall and are not of a size and depth that will create harmful stress concentrations. Such marks may not conflict with any DOT required markings."

So basically, if the engraving were accidental damage, it might be allowable, but if you construe it as "Other markings", and it is on the side wall, then it is unauthorized and the tank is condemned.

This is a true statement "Other markings", and it is on the side wall, then it is unauthorized and the tank is condemned.
I just returned from my Dot Hydro re-certification class. The hydro tester in question was in this class and the cylinder was evaluated by the DOT Trainer. The cylinder is scrap! More cylinders are (and should be) condemned by visual inspection than hydro testing. There is no "bring it to another facility" for a second opinion. It should be X'ed out. Hydro facility's are required to maintain Dot records so there is always paperwork and shop time involved so there should be some payment due for services rendered. The customer, (the dive shop in this case) is supposed to be be notified in writing that the cyl is condemned but the shop has no right to keep it unless it is in lieu of payment. I occasionally do this myself based on the customers circumstances. This is an unfortunate error was made by engraving the cyl's but it is not allowed per the DOT. Minor pitting or corrosion cumulative over an area (in this case a 3 inch rose) can fail that thick walled Alum cyl. If you attended one of these classes you would be amazed at how many more cyl's should be condemned based on visual inspection. If this cyl was passed by the retester and somewhere down the road something happened to it or a DOT inspector came across it they would come back to the shop that passed it fine him thousands of dollars and possibly shut his livelihood down. Hydrotesters carry a huge liability with the DOT and I for one will always error on the the side of safety, when in doubt fail the cyl.
A human life is not worth the cost of a cylinder!
That's the bottom line!

 

[oxyhacker]

It's probably worth mentioning that CFR 178.35(f)(6) is in the "Specifications for Packaging" section, which deals with manufacture of cylinders, so it applies to the manufacturering, and does not necessarily authorize anyone other than the manufacturer to put "other markings" on a tank.

QUOTE=adelman;5750342]I think the problem is 49 CFR 178.35(f)(6) "Other markings are authorized provided they are made in low stress areas other than the side wall and are not of a size and depth that will create harmful stress concentrations. Such marks may not conflict with any DOT required markings."
[/QUOTE]