[ID] => 6822
[post_author] => 34
[post_date] => 2016-09-19 13:02:09
[post_date_gmt] => 2016-09-19 12:02:09
[post_content] => The Joint Meeting of the RID Committee of Experts and the UN Economic Commission for Europe (ECE) Working Party on the Transport of Dangerous Goods (WP15) was held in Bern from 14 to 18 March 2016, with Claude Pfauvadel (France) as chairman and Helmut Rein (Germany) as vice-chairman.
The meeting was attended by delegates from 26 countries and representatives from the European Union (EU), the Organisation for Cooperation between Railways (OSJD) and 16 non-governmental organisations.
The joint meeting essentially aims to harmonise, wherever possible, the rules that govern the transport of dangerous goods by rail (RID), road (ADR) and inland waterway (ADN) within Europe and in other countries that observe the same regulations.
The first part of this report on the spring 2016 meeting in the last issue of HCB Monthly (October 2016, page 124) mainly covered the papers dealt with by the working groups on tanks and standards; this second part covers the remaining discussions, including a large number of proposals for miscellaneous amendments.
In response to details provided by the European Chemical Industry Council (Cefic), the Joint Meeting made changes to 126.96.36.199.14, 188.8.131.52.9 and 184.108.40.206.10.5 to reflect the implementation of EC Regulation 1272/2008 on the classification, labelling and packaging of substances and mixtures (CLP Regulation) and the resulting repeal of Directives 67/548/EEC and 1999/45/EC and amendment of EC Regulation 1907/2006.
The changes were designed as a simple way to align the classification criteria in RID/ADR/ADN with those of the globally harmonised system (GHS) of classification and labelling of chemicals.
A paper from the International Standardisation Organisation (ISO) referred to a decision by the UN Sub-committee of Experts on the transport of dangerous goods (TDG) to adopt a correction to packing instruction P200 and that a similar correction to P206 was anticipated at their next session. The Joint Meeting agreed to adopt the same amendments to take effect in the 2017 editions of the regulations. The amendments involve rationalisation of the terms “liquid phase”, “liquid component” and “liquefied gas”.
There was more discussion on a proposal from Austria to amend the provisions already adopted for the 2017 text in 220.127.116.11.3 on the marking or ventilation of means of transport carrying packaged dangerous goods requiring cooling or conditioning. It felt that the new text is confusing.
There was some support for Austria’s position, although its proposal to delete reference to the Agreement on the International Carriage of Perishable Foodstuffs and on the Special Equipment to be Used for such Carriage (ATP) was not deemed helpful. Instead, the Joint Meeting accepted an alternative proposal and replaced the words “where this requirement is fulfilled” by “and separated from accessible compartments during carriage” (RID/ADN)/“and separated from the driver’s cabin” (ADR).
Switzerland also sought to make changes to texts already adopted for 2017, in this case the various exemptions in 1.1.3 as they relate to special provision 363 and 666. The Joint Meeting was not minded to reopen this can of worms, which had already taken up a lot of time, but it did recognise some value in the Swiss proposals, which referred to discussions at the November meeting of WP15. At that session some contradictions were identified between those exemptions in 18.104.22.168 and 22.214.171.124 that remain applicable and the new special provision, and there were also concerns over problems in implementing the exemption criteria in paragraph (g)(iv) of SP363.
The Joint Meeting agreed to amend the Note after the first paragraph of SP363 by replacing “126.96.36.199” with “188.8.131.52(a), (d) and (e), 184.108.40.206 and 220.127.116.11”. It also added “…unless it is essential for the equipment to remain operational” to the end of sub-paragraph (b) in SP666.
In addition, a new special provision was adopted at the instigation of France:
669 A trailer fitted with equipment, powered by a liquid or gaseous fuel or an electric energy storage and production system, that is intended for use during carriage operated by this trailer as a part of a transport unit, shall be assigned to UN numbers 3166 or 3171 and be subject to the same conditions as specified for these UN numbers, when carried as a load on a vehicle/wagon/vessel, provided that the total capacity of the tanks containing liquid fuel does not exceed 500 litres.
The French proposal also resulted in the addition of a new Note to both 18.104.22.168(a) and 22.214.171.124(a):
A container fitted with equipment for use during carriage, secured on a vehicle, is considered as an integral part of the vehicle and benefits from the same exemptions as regards the fuel necessary to operate the equipment.
Another paper from Switzerland sought to establish transport categories and tunnel codes for equipment of UN 3166, 3171 and 3528 to 3530. Most delegates felt that the new SP666 covers this for UN 3166 and 3171 and that SP363 suffices for the other entries.
However, discussions ranged far and wide and it was evident that there is disagreement on how to deal with damaged vehicles and battery-powered vehicles. Switzerland also wondered why packing instruction P005 had been created for UN 3528 to 3530 when SP363 exempts them from applying P005. In an informal document it offered a way out of the problem. Germany maintained, however, that it was necessary to maintain a linkage between P005 and SP363, so as to harmonise with the UN Model Regulations. It suggested a new special provision and no change to P005. Switzerland countered that this should mean a transport category is needed but the UK insisted that tunnel codes and transport categories are not applicable for these consignments.
Discussion concluded that the UN TDG Sub-committee should be asked for its opinion on the matter. Further, any decision on tunnel codes is a matter for WP15, not the Joint Meeting.
In three informal documents, Germany, Switzerland and the UK offered up proposals to amend SP636 relating to the carriage of lithium batteries with batteries of other types and the carriage of waste equipment containing lithium batteries for recycling or disposal. The Joint Meeting agreed to remove the square brackets around the new text tentatively adopted for SP636(b) at the previous session. The new text before sub-paragraph (i) will read:
Up to the intermediate processing facility:
– lithium cells and batteries with a gross mass of not more than 500 g each or lithium ion cells with a Watt-hour rating of not more than 20 Wh, lithium ion batteries with a Watt- hour rating of not more than 100 Wh, lithium metal cells with a lithium content of not more than 1 g and lithium metal cells with an aggregate lithium content of not more than 2 g, not contained in equipment, collected and handed over for carriage for sorting, disposal or recycling; as well as
– lithium cells and batteries contained in equipment from private households collected and handed over for carriage for depollution, dismantling, recycling or disposal.
NOTE: “Equipment from private households” means equipment which comes from private households and equipment which comes from commercial, industrial, institutional and other sources which, because of its nature and quantity, is similar to that from private households. Equipment likely to be used by both private households and users other than private households shall in any event be considered to be equipment from private households.
are not subject to the other provisions of RID/ADR including special provision 376 and paragraph 126.96.36.199.7, if they meet the following conditions:
Sub-paragraph (iii) or SP636(b) is amended to read:
Packages are marked "LITHIUM BATTERIES FOR DISPOSAL" or "LITHIUM BATTERIES FOR RECYCLING" as appropriate.
If equipment containing lithium cells or batteries is carried unpackaged or on pallets in accordance with packing instruction P 909 (3) of 188.8.131.52, this mark may alternatively be affixed to the external surface of the wagons/vehicles or containers.
Switzerland’s proposal to make further changes to SP636(b) was deemed to be a new proposal that would have to be considered first by the informal working group on the transport of waste electrical and electronic equipment.
The European Federation of Waste Management and Environmental Services (FEAD) provided its opinion on the topic of the use of intermediate bulk containers (IBCs) as salvage packagings, as the previous session of the Joint Meeting had invited comments from industry. At present, 184.108.40.206.1 of RID/ADR allows IBCs to be used as salvage packagings but alignment with the UN Model Regulations would remove this possibility. FEAD noted that its members do use IBCs in this way and if specific reference to IBCs is deleted from that paragraph then that usage would not be possible.
The main issue is that IBCs are not tested (or designed) to contain objects. The UN experts had used this argument to specify that large packagings should be used as salvage packagings. However, after hearing FEAD’s evidence, and noting that it specifically referred to IBCs of type 11A, the Joint Meeting decided that this practice ought to continue. It achieved this through the amendment of the second sentence of 220.127.116.11.1 to read:
This does not prevent the use of a larger size packaging, an IBC of type 11A or a large packaging of appropriate type and performance level and under the conditions of 18.104.22.168.2 and 22.214.171.124.3.
The Intergovernmental Organisation for International Carriage by Rail (OTIF) supplied a document summarising the fifth session of the RID Committee of Experts’ standing working group, which took place in Zagreb in November 2015. Some of the amendments it had adopted for RID could have relevance for ADR and these were brought to the Joint Meeting’s attention. As a result, the following amendments were agreed:
- in 126.96.36.199.14, in the list before the Note, “Vehicles” is added before “engines and machinery, internal combustion”; and
- “CW28/CV28” is added in column (18) of the Dangerous Goods List for UN entries 0015, 0016 and 0303.
Germany proposed to expand the wording of the first paragraph of P910(3) to clarify the competent authorities concerned in the approval of the transport of prototype and short-run production lithium batteries. Although some delegations queried its necessity, the proposal was carried on a vote. The first sentence of that packing instruction will now read:
The equipment or the batteries may be carried unpackaged under conditions specified by the competent authority of any RID Contracting State/Contracting Party to ADR/ADN, which may also recognize an approval granted by the competent authority of a country which is not an RID Contracting State/a Contracting Party to ADR/ADN, provided that this approval has been granted in accordance with the procedures applicable according to RID, ADR, ADN, the IMDG Code or the ICAO Technical Instructions.
Germany had spotted the need for some consequential amendments following the incorporation of the new provisions relating to polymerising substances. The Joint Meeting was in agreement with the proposals, which involved inserting “polymerizing substances” after “self-reactive substances” in the title of label 4.1 in 188.8.131.52.2 and in column 1 of the model of the instructions in writing in 184.108.40.206.
Germany sought an extension of the transitional provision in 220.127.116.11 on the use of labels with reduced dimensions. The UN TDG Sub-committee has adopted an amendment for the 20th revised edition of the Model Regulations, which should appear in RID/ADR/ADN in 2019. The Joint Meeting agreed with the reasoning and extended the transitional provision to run until 30 June 2019.
France offered the observation that some new types of reusable labels last for quite a long time and that, as a result, perhaps the transitional provision should be extended further. The Joint Meeting took note of this and will take it into account when discussing the 2019 text of RID/ADR/ADN.
At the request of OTIF, references to the IMO/ILO/UNECE Guidelines for Packing of Cargo Transport Units (CTUs) in 5.4.2 and 18.104.22.168.1 are replaced by “IMO/ILO/UNECE Code of Practice for Packing of Cargo Transport Units (CTU Code)”.
OTIF presented a paper identifying differences between the various language versions of RID/ADR/ADN, based on work done by Francesco Battista, a member of the Italian delegation. The Joint Meeting accepted the changes suggested. Those that affect the English language versions of the text include:
- replacing “in one packaging” with “in one package” in 22.214.171.124.6;
- deletion of “or mixture” from 126.96.36.199.10.2.6(c);
- replacing “iron plate” with “lead plate” in 188.8.131.52(3);
- replacing “articles of Class 4.1” with “substances of Class 4.1” in SP528;
- inserting “(UN Nos 2555, 2556 or 2557)” after “Class 4.1” in SP531; and
- replacing “Provisions for the consignment” by “Provisions for the carriage” in the third sentence of P620, additional requirement 2(c).
Portugal persisted with its contention that there is ambiguity in some entries in the Dangerous Goods List, insofar as they have a transport category in column (15) but no packing instruction in column (8). Aside from being confusing, this can lead to the abuse of the exemptions in 184.108.40.206.
Most other delegations opposed the idea, some quiet vociferously. Portugal withdrew the proposal but indicated that it might reappear. A suggestion from the UK that the addition of P005 in column (8) for the relevant entries might help received some positive remarks but no action has been taken for now.
The Secretariat provided a summary of the discussions that took place during the 48th session of the UN TDG Sub-committee. The only concrete outcome for RID/ADR/ADN was the replacement of “[radioactive material]” with “radioactivity” in SP369.
The European Association of Dangerous Goods Safety Advisers (EASA), having found what it felt were inconsistencies in sections 1.3.2 and 1.8.3, sought changes that would provide more specific requirements and, in doing so, increase the role of the dangerous goods safety adviser (DGSA).
Several delegations opposed all the proposals put forward by EASA, as they did not see how they could improve safety, and no cost estimates had been done for implementation of the proposed measures. Others said that their national DGSA associations did not support the proposals.
Some editorial amendments to section 1.8.3 were accepted but EASA was asked to return with more specific proposals and costings for its suggestions.
France felt that the current requirements for the carriage of orange-coloured plates do not, in some circumstances, provide sufficient information to the emergency services in the event of an accident. In particular, its paper highlighted the situation regarding packaged radioactive material where the load corresponds to a single UN number, whether under exclusive use or not.
The Joint Meeting acknowledged France’s concern but pointed out that the amendment proposed would not be in compliance with the International Atomic Energy Agency’s (IAEA) safety standards. It would be useful to know IAEA’s opinion on the subject and also whether this might apply to other transport modes.
Spain sought alignment of the BK and VC codes applicable to the carriage of dangerous goods in bulk. It noted that the BK requirements are in general stricter than those for VC codes but that there are several instances in the Dangerous Goods List where an entry is assigned a VC code but no BK code.
Some felt that this should already be apparent from the text but on balance the Joint Meeting accepted that a note to 220.127.116.11 would help clarify matters. This is currently listed as being due to be included in the 2019 texts:
NOTE: Where a VC1 code is shown in column (17) of Table A of Chapter 3.2, a BK1 bulk container may therefore also be used for land transport provided the additional provisions in 18.104.22.168 are fulfilled. Where a VC2 code is shown in column (17) of Table A of Chapter 3.2, a BK2 bulk container may therefore also be used for land transport provided the additional provisions in 22.214.171.124 are fulfilled.
The European Industrial Gases Association (EIGA) highlighted an incompatibility between the RID/ADR text in 126.96.36.199 and the Note at the start of section 4.1.1. This had been noted by a UN TDG Sub-committee working group looking at global recognition of UN and non-UN pressure receptacles.
A simplified solution to the problem, drafted by the UK, was accepted for entry into force in 2019. This consists of a new Note under the heading to Chapter 4.1 and the deletion of 188.8.131.52:
NOTE: Packagings, including IBCs and large packagings, marked in accordance with 6.1.3, 184.108.40.206, 220.127.116.11, 18.104.22.168, 22.214.171.124, 6.3.4, 6.5.2 or 6.6.3 but which were approved in a State which is not an RID Contracting State / a Contracting Party to ADR may nevertheless be used for carriage under RID/ADR.
It was noted that special provisions for mixed packing MP16 is not referred to in the Dangerous Goods List and it was therefore deleted from 126.96.36.199.
In an informal document Sweden raised concerns that the exemptions available in 188.8.131.52(c) are being applied in at least one member state to the carriage of explosives to a blasting operation. It felt this was an “undesirable situation” and sought the views of other delegations. The Joint Meeting felt this to be an issue worth following up and asked Sweden to submit an official proposal.
Italy noted what had apparently been some oversights in terms of consequential amendments following the introduction of type 4N metal packagings into RID/ADR in 2011. The Joint Meeting agreed, adding “4N” to the list of boxes in 184.108.40.206 and the list of packagings in 220.127.116.11. It also felt this should be brought to the attention of the UN TDG Sub-committee.
Italy also felt it a problem that, while packing instruction P200 refers to Xb and IS inspection bodies, the definitions of those terms are not found until 18.104.22.168. It felt a note referring to that paragraph would be helpful. The Joint Meeting agreed but instead pointed to 22.214.171.124.1.
Another proposal from Italy was based on the feeling that the five-yearly requalification of DGSAs spans at least two editorial changes to the regulations and that therefore the allowance in 126.96.36.199.2 that existing DGSAs need not take the case study element of the examination is not warranted. After some discussion Italy was invited to submit a formal proposal for the next session.
France provided a report on the work of the informal working group on telematics, which had met in Bordeaux in October 2015 during the Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS) World Congress.
Discussions at that meeting ranged widely, taking in: voluntary transport monitoring using ITS techniques; a draft impact assessment document; potential cost reductions from going paperless; telematics applications for freight services, interoperability and possible links with the TP1 architecture; emergency response; the collection of accident statistics; safety issues; centralised versus decentralised architectures for TP1; and issues that may potentially emerge in the future.
France suggested that it would be economically worthwhile for the Contracting Parties to RID/ADR/ADN to have a single interface – TP1 – with maximum geographical coverage and that this should be hosted by the UN Economic Commission for Europe. This could also provide a link with the European Railways Agency (ERA) system.
Germany reported on an initiative concerning the use of electronic transport documents in the country. Some delegations were disappointed that this was progressing ahead of any agreed international system but it was agreed to include such a bottom-up approach in the context of the informal working group on telematics.
The Joint Meeting also took note of the work pans for the informal working groups on the transport of waste electrical and electronic equipment, alternative methods for periodic inspection of refillable cylinders and the service equipment of tanks and pressure receptacles.
The Joint Meeting also took note of the outcome of the fifth and sixth ERA workshops on the roadmap on risk management in the context of rail, road and inland waterways transport of dangerous goods. A seventh meeting was scheduled to take place in June 2016 in Valenciennes.
EIGA provided information aimed at justifying renewal of multilateral special agreement M237 on the use of DOT receptacles for the carriage of gas between countries contracting parties to RID or ADR. EIGA and its US counterpart, the Compressed Gas Association (CGA) were in the process of petitioning the US Department of Transportation (DOT) for a rulemaking on the recognition in the US of pressure receptacles approved by RID/ADR contracting parties, in return for similar recognition of US cylinders in RID/ADR/ADN. This process will take at least two years.
There was general agreement that this should be done and the UK offered to draw up a new multilateral agreement.
Romania had offered up to the Joint Meeting a paper on the definitions of reference steel and mild steel. This matter was deemed to be an issue for the UN TDG Sub-committee and particularly its working group on tanks.
The autumn 2016 session of the Joint Meeting was scheduled to take place in Geneva from 19 to 23 September. A report on this meeting will appear in a forthcoming issue of HCB Monthly.
[post_title] => Real-life problems
[post_status] => publish
[comment_status] => open
[ping_status] => open
[post_name] => real-life-problems
[post_modified] => 2016-09-19 13:02:09
[post_modified_gmt] => 2016-09-19 12:02:09
[post_parent] => 0
[guid] => https://www.hcblive.com/?p=6822
[menu_order] => 0
[post_type] => post
[comment_count] => 0
[filter] => raw
The spring session of the Joint Meeting of RID/ADR/ADN experts wrestled with practical implementation of changes made by the UN experts