PURPOSE: This rule regulates the storage and handling of liquefied petroleum gases. The balance of the rule sets forth installation procedures required for liquefied petroleum gas carburetion which are not contained in National Fire Protection Association Manual No. 58.

PUBLISHER’S NOTE: The secretary of state has determined that the publication of the entire text of the material which is incorporated by reference as a portion of this rule would be unduly cumbersome or expensive. This material as incorporated by reference in this rule shall be maintained by the agency at its headquarters and shall be made available to the public for inspection and copying at no more than the actual cost of reproduction. This note applies only to the reference material. The entire text of the rule is printed here.

1. (1) This rule incorporates by reference National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Manual No. 58, Storage and Handling of Liquefied Petroleum Gases, 2008 edition, published by the National Fire Protection Association, 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA 02269-9101, as the current standard for the storage and handling of liquefied petroleum gases (LP gas). This rule does not incorporate any subsequent amendments or additions to the referenced material.
2. (2) All equipment shall be installed and maintained in compliance with the safety standards and in conformity with the rules.
3. (3) At all LP gas dispensers, it shall be the dispenser owner’s responsibility to provide initial training to persons who dispense propane. It shall be illegal for any person other than the trained person to operate the dispensing device. It shall be the responsibility of the owner or manager of each business, where a dispenser is located and operated, to ensure dispenser operators successfully complete training every three (3) years through a training program approved by the director.
4. (4) The written Fire Safety Analysis, required by the 2008 edition of the National Fire Protection Association’s Pamphlet 58, Liquefied Petroleum Gas Code, 6.25.3, published by the National Fire Protection Association, 1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA 02269- 9101, and incorporated by reference, shall be prepared by a person approved by the Missouri Propane Gas Commission, who has relevant experience and is knowledgeable of the practices of the LP gas industry. Except for an engineered facility, the Fire Safety Analysis may be prepared by the owner of the facility in cooperation with the local fire department and/or fire marshal. The Fire Safety Analysis for an engineered facility, such as one that incorporates refrigerated storage, automated fuel standby (either industrial or utility), or pipeline terminals, shall be prepared, stamped, and signed by a professional engineer who has relevant experience in LP gas or fire protection. This rule does not incorporate any subsequent amendments or additions to the referenced material.

AUTHORITY: section 261.023.6, RSMo 2000 and section 323.020, RSMo Supp. 2010.* Original rule filed Jan. 24, 1968, effective Feb. 3, 1968. Amended: Filed Sept. 8, 1969, effective Sept. 18, 1969. Amended: Filed Nov. 1, 1972, effective Nov. 10, 1972. Amended: Filed May 13, 1977, effective Jan. 13, 1978. Emergency amendment filed March 27, 1981, effective April 7, 1981, expired July 10, 1981. Amended: Filed March 27, 1981, effective July 11, 1981. Amended: Filed May 2, 1985, effective Sept. 27, 1985. Amended: Filed March 3, 1989, effective June 29, 1989. Amended: Filed Nov. 13, 1997, effec- 2 CSR 90-10 tive June 30, 1998. Emergency amendment filed June 20, 2002, effective June 30, 2002, expired Dec. 30, 2002. Amended: Filed Dec. 3, 2001, effective June 30, 2002. Amended: Filed Oct. 15, 2008, effective March 30, 2009. Amended: Filed June 13, 2011, effective Jan. 30, 2012. *Original authority: 261.023.6, RSMo 1973 and 323.020, RSMo 1947, amended 1994, 1998, 2005, 2007. McConnell v. Pic-Walsh Freight Co., 432 SW2d 292 (Mo. 1968). Plaintiff, employee of an LP gas company was not contributorily negligent as a matter of law when he overfilled an LP gas tank on one (1) of defendant’s trucks after being assured by defendant’s employees that the tank was empty; plaintiff having no way of knowing the level of gas due to broken gauge. Defendant claimed plaintiff was negligent per se because he violated safety rules concerning the filling of tanks inside a building, but court held that “all reasonable minds would not conclude that the infractions were the proximate cause of the injury in this case, and therefore . . . plaintiff is not as a matter of law barred from recovery.”