On 8/14/97 9:58 PM, ejsadler@Pa*.ne* wrote: >Although Bill has correctly quoted the DOT CFRs, he neglected to throw in >the General requirements which define the scope of the regulations >(49CFR). If you care to peruse the requirements below, you will see that >they are qualified with the terms IN COMMERCE. > >Thus, Rick was correct when he stated that DOT CFRs do not apply to >privately owned SCUBA cylinders. EJ - Bill Bott may get low marks for "works and plays well with others" but he couldn't be more right in his reading of the CFR, including the fact that these regs *do* apply to all privately owned scuba cylinders. You can't read the CFS alone without looking at how they've been applied by the Courts and federal agencies. "In Commerce" is a very broad term -- your scuba tanks are "in commerce" every time you throw them in your trunk and drive on an interstate. Andrew Cohen is right that the real-world chance of a DOT inspector busting you for violating the regs is nil -- but there's no question they apply. Best - BW Best Regards -- Bill -- Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'. Send list subscription requests to `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'.
Navigate by Author:
[Previous]
[Next]
[Author Search Index]
Navigate by Subject:
[Previous]
[Next]
[Subject Search Index]
[Send Reply] [Send Message with New Topic]
[Search Selection] [Mailing List Home] [Home]