US Dept of Labor

Occupational Safety & Health AdministrationWe Can Help

Standard Interpretations - Table of Contents
• Standard Number: 1910.252

October 22, 1980

Norman C. Fawley, President
NCF Industries
1120 Union Bank Building
Oceangate Financial Center
Long Beach, California 90802

Dear Mr. Fawley:

This is in response to your recent letter regarding value protection for compressed gas cylinders. This also confirms telephone conversations on the subject matter with Mr. Pete Wasko, a member of my staff.

Your letter and submitted documents indicate that you are well aware of the compliance interpretation of the OSHA standard, 29 CFR 1910.252(a)(2)(i)(d) applying to valve protection of industrial compressed gas cylinders. Your particular problem, as you indicate, in the marketing of your valve protection product appears to be the use of the work "cap" instead of "device" in the applicable standards.

Because of the time involved in possible revising the standard to change "cap" to device", you request an administrative interpretation or ruling.

It appears that your device is very similar to the device known as a "salamander cap" which had been accepted by the LP-Gas Industry many years ago and continues in use to this day. This information is substantiated by your DOT Attachment #7 and also by our conversation with Mr. Paul Seay of DOT Materials Transportation Bureau. Based on your previous contact with DOT, Mr. Seay stated that your device meets DOT regulations, in particular the test indicated in their regulation Section 173.301(g)(3). Your DOT Attachment #7 also indicates this.

The OSHA standards, e.q., 29 CFR 1910.252(a)(2)(i)(d) which refer to the value protection cap, do not state any requirements for the design of the cap. It appears that your device meets the intent of value protection required by a cap, collar, or a recession in the cylinder. However, as you know, the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 contains no provision allowing OSHA to endorse, promote or approve any equipment, services, etc., of any kind. Alteration or misapplication of an otherwise safe piece of equipment, for example, could easily create a hazardous condition beyond the control of the manufacturer, for this reason, compliance with the appropriate OSHA standards can only be determined by the Compliance Safety and Health Officer observing it actually in are under specific conditions.

If we may be of further assistance, please call or write.


Bruce Hillenbrand
Acting Director, Federal
Compliance and State Programs

Standard Interpretations - Table of Contents

Thank You for Visiting Our Website

You are exiting the Department of Labor's Web server.

The Department of Labor does not endorse, takes no responsibility for, and exercises no control over the linked organization or its views, or contents, nor does it vouch for the accuracy or accessibility of the information contained on the destination server. The Department of Labor also cannot authorize the use of copyrighted materials contained in linked Web sites. Users must request such authorization from the sponsor of the linked Web site. Thank you for visiting our site. Please click the button below to continue.