Issues regarding the supervision and inspection of gas pressure regulating devices (i.e., Special Quality Inspection Letter No. [2016] 46)
Thread Content
This post was last edited by LBTZE on 2018-7-2 at 16:15. Our company is located in Tianjin and specializes in the production of gas pressure regulation and metering equipment (commonly known as skid-mounted equipment). During the delivery of a project in Zhejiang, the local inspection agency required that such equipment undergo supervision and inspection, citing the provisions regarding skid-mounted pressure-bearing equipment and equipment systems in Document No. [2016]46 issued by the Quality Inspection Authority. However, after consulting the Tianjin Inspection Agency, we were informed that such equipment does not require supervision and inspection. Despite further discussions with the Zhejiang Inspection Agency, they persisted in their demand for supervision and inspection. Since the equipment had already been manufactured, it was necessary for the Zhejiang Inspection Agency to carry out the inspection, using as a basis TSG D0001-2009 along with our company’s design drawings. Yet, TSG D0001 is not applicable to skid-mounted equipment at all. I originally wanted to leave a message at the **General Administration for Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine to ask questions, but someone had already posed those questions on the message board. The administration clearly stated that no inspection was required. However, in cases like this, it can only urge the manufacturing factory and the inspection agency in the location where the equipment is used to coordinate with each other – but such coordination is practically impossible. How can ordinary people fight against officials? ! ”Moreover, according to people from the Zhejiang Special Inspection Institute, such equipment within Zhejiang has also been inspected. Personally, I think the main issue is a difference in understanding of the “equipment system”. I would appreciate it if you could give me some advice; thank you very much!
This situation is unique to China, and it requires sales staff to do some persuasion work.
This kind of work is not easy to carry out; it involves mandatory inspection – if no inspection is carried out, use is not allowed. The manufacturers refuse to conduct such inspections even when paid to do so. What should be done?
This post was last edited by niat8888 on 2018-7-5 07:44. Written reports were submitted to the quality supervision bureaus in the two respective locations; a written statement indicating that no inspection is required at the place of manufacture was obtained, as well as a request for an inspection at the place of use. Subsequently, a report was sent to the Special Administration Bureau of the State Administration for Market Regulation. . . . Ask the ad hoc unit to provide a written response on what companies should do. . . Everything is in written form. . .
Forget it, just give in. 1. The processing time for this method is likely to be long, and the delivery deadline for the equipment will not allow enough time ； 2. If doing this ultimately forces the special inspection agency in charge to stop requiring mandatory inspections, wouldn’t that be like slapping them in the face? From now on, our company’s equipment will never be allowed to enter this province again. Still, thanks for your idea!
We have encountered the same problem; how did you solve it?
Refer to the latest reply from the General Administration; the key is to check whether pressure vessels are involved
Then we should follow the advice from the seventh floor. It’s not actually that difficult to do this, unless the relevant documents aren’t prepared from the start. In any case, whether there is supervision or not, it makes no difference for the company; the necessary documents must be available, and the required inspections must be carried out
What needs to be done for the manufacturing supervision and inspection once it has been delivered to the user unit and installed? Manufacturing inspection is carried out at the production site, while installation inspection is conducted at the location of use. If it belongs to a component assembly device, manufacturing inspection should be carried out at the place of production. Can a manufacturing inspection report be submitted even if all the necessary documents are available?
How was it resolved in the end? Thank you