WP15 gets to work on ADR 2023

STRAIGHT ALONG THE WAY

ROAD • ADR 2021 MAY STILL BE HOT OFF THE PRESS BUT WP15 HAS ALREADY STARTED WORK ON THE 2023 EDITION, CATCHING UP ON THE SHORTAGE OF MEETINGS DURING 2020

THE UN ECONOMIC Commission for Europe’s (ECE) Working Party on the Transport of Dangerous Goods (WP15) held its 108th session this past 10 to 13 November, after it had been postponed from its original 11 to 15 May dates due to the Covid-19 pandemic and its associated restrictions. In addition, financial constraints, renovation work at the Palais des Nations in Geneva and a shortage of meeting rooms equipped to hold hybrid online and in-person session, as well as a reduction in the availability of interpreters, caused the meeting to be reduced by one day. Furthermore, while some work was done on the first two days, it was only on the last two days when interpreters were available was the session able to take decisions.

The meeting was chaired by Ariane Roumier (France) with Alfonso Simoni (Italy) as vice-chair. Representatives from 23 countries attended, whether in person or online, along with a representative of Tunisia, who took part as a full member of ADR. Also represented were the EU, the Intergovernmental Organisation for International Carriage by Rail (OTIF), the EuroMed project and six nongovernmental organisations.

The meeting welcomed the accession of Uzbekistan to ADR but noted that 13 countries have yet to deposit the required instruments for the Protocol to enter into force. It also noted that the proposed amendment of the title of ADR, dropping the word ‘European’, had been accepted and would take effect on 1 January 2021. Furthermore, the amendments to ADR adopted over the previous two years had been accepted for inclusion in the 2021 edition of ADR, which sets out the regulations governing the international transport of dangerous goods by road within Europe – and increasingly elsewhere in the world – and also domestic transport within the EU.

The Working Party was also impressed that, Covid-19 restrictions notwithstanding, the UN ECE secretariat and publications services in Geneva had managed to publish the 2021 edition in good time.

JOINT MEETING DECISIONS The Working Party then began the task of developing the changes that will appear in the 2023 edition of ADR, beginning with a review of the decisions made by the RID/ADR/ADN Joint Meeting at its autumn 2020 session, so as to maintain multimodal harmonisation.

WP15 deferred a final decision on the proposed changes in Chapter 1.2, and the rearrangement of the way it treats definitions and abbreviations, as this will be reviewed once more by the spring 2021 Joint Meeting, and also sought more time to study the EU’s

ADR 2023 IS LIKELY TO SEE A LONGER LIST

Inland TDG Risk Management Framework before adopting a non-binding reference to it in 1.9.4. This will be dealt with at the next session.

The other amendments adopted by the Joint Meeting were endorsed, with one very small change: the new transitional provision in 1.6.4.55, which deals with tank containers that do not meet the requirements of 6.8.3.4.6 applicable from 1 January 2023 and allows their continued use providing they are subject to an intermediate inspection no more than six years after each periodic inspection. WP15 felt this should refer specifically to 6.8.3.4.6(b) to make it clear that it only covers those tank containers for which intermediate inspections were not mandatory until 31 December 2022.

The other amendments made by the Joint Meeting and endorsed by WP15 are as follows.

In the table in 1.1.3.6.3, for Transport Category 2, column (2), for Class 9, “3536” is added at the end.

The fifth indent of 2.2.2.2.2 is amended to read: – Dissolved gases which cannot be classified under UN Nos. 1001, 1043, 2073 or 3318.

For UN No. 1043, see special provision 642; In the Dangerous Goods List, the proper shipping name of UN 1345 is expanded by adding at the end: “, not exceeding 840 microns and rubber content exceeding 45%”.

For UN 1872, in column (3b), “OT2” becomes “O2”; “+6.1” is deleted from column (5); in column (12), “SGAN” is replaced by “SGAV”; “VC1 VC2 AP6 AP7” is added in column (17); “CV28” is deleted from column (18); and in column (20), “56” is amended to read “50”.

For the first entry under UN 2015, the proper shipping name in column (2) is amended by inserting before the existing text “HYDROGEN PEROXIDE, STABILISED or”.

For UN 3509, “VC1” is inserted in column (17); for UN 3536, in the top of the cell in column (15), “-“ is replaced by “2”. Changes in Table A of Chapter 3.2 are mirrored by consequential changes in Table B.

There are a number of changes to the special provisions in Chapter 3.3. At the beginning of the last sentence of SP 389, “Except as provided in 1.1.3.6” is inserted. In SP 591, “of Class 8” is inserted after “the requirements”. A new sentence is added at the end of SP 642:

Otherwise, for carriage of ammonia solution, see UN Nos. 2073, 2672 and 3318.

For SP 663, the first paragraph under ‘General provisions’ is amended to read: Packagings, discarded, empty, uncleaned with residues presenting a primary or subsidiary hazard of Class 5.1 shall not be loaded in bulk together with packagings, discarded, empty, uncleaned with residues presenting a hazard of other classes. Packagings, discarded, empty, uncleaned with residues presenting a primary or subsidiary hazard of Class 5.1 shall not be packed with other packagings, discarded, empty, uncleaned with residues presenting hazards of other classes in the same outer packaging.

In 4.1.4.1, packing instruction P200(13), in 2.4, the reference to EN ISO 11114-1 is updated to the 2020 edition.

The tables in 4.1.6.15 have been updated and the opening paragraph is amended to read: For UN pressure receptacles, the ISO standards and EN ISO standards listed in Table 1, except EN ISO 14245 and EN ISO 15995, shall be applied. For information on which standard shall be used at the time of manufacturing the equipment, see 6.2.2.3.

For other pressure receptacles, the requirements of section 4.1.6 are considered to have been complied with if the standards in Table 1, as relevant, are applied. For information on which standards shall be used for the manufacture of valves with inherent protection, see 6.2.4.1. For information on the applicability of standards for manufacturing valve protection caps and valve guards, see Table 2:

Paragraph 4.3.3.3.2, which requires indication of any previous cargo other than the immediately preceding gas carried in a tank, battery vehicle or multiple-element gas containers (MEGCs) to be covered up, is deleted. »

The Note to 5.3.2.1.5 is amended to read: This paragraph need not be applied to vehicles carrying bulk containers, tanks and MEGCs with a maximum capacity of 3 000 litres.

In note 2 to 6.2.3.5.1, a standard reference is updated to read “EN ISO 16148:2016+A1:2020”. There are a number of other updated references to standards in 6.2.4.1 and 6.2.5.4.2.

A new sentence is added after the first sentence of 6.8.2.2.1: Welded elements shall be attached to the shell in such a way that tearing of the shell is prevented.

In 6.8.2.6.1, the reference in the table to EN 13175 is updated.

Paragraph 6.8.3.4.6 is amended to read: For tanks intended for the carriage of refrigerated liquefied gases: (a) By derogation from the requirements of 6.8.2.4.2, the periodic inspections shall take place at least after six years at least after eight years of service and thereafter at least every 12 years. (b) By derogation from the requirements of 6.8.2.4.3, the intermediate inspections shall take place at least six years after each periodic inspection.

In 6.8.4(a), TC6 is amended to read: The wall thickness of tanks made of aluminium not less than 99 % pure or aluminium alloy need not exceed 15 mm even where calculation in accordance with 6.8.2.1.17 gives a higher value.

In 6.8.4(b), the second sentence of TE14 is amended to read: The thermal insulation directly in contact with the shell and/or components of the heating system shall have an ignition temperature at least 50°C higher than the maximum temperature for which the tank was designed.

PROPOSALS ON TANKS France sought a change to 9.7.6 to clarify the requirement for the rear protection of vehicles and, specifically, the meaning of the “clearance of at least 100 mm between the rear wall of the tank and the rear of the bumper”, which it said is ambiguous.

There were mixed views on how this provision should be interpreted and its was agreed that discussion should continue, on the basis of a revised proposal to be submitted by France that will take into account comments made during the session.

The representative of the Netherlands informed the Working Party about the results of the work of the task force on the use of battery electric vehicles and hydrogen fuel cell vehicles for the transport of dangerous goods, which will be developed into a paper to form the basis of discussion at a future session of WP15. Another meeting of the task force was due to be held in January 2021, with the participation of the World Forum for Harmonisation of Vehicle Regulations (WP29).

Netherlands and the European Chemical Industry Council (Cefic) returned to a topic they had raised at the 106th session of WP15 regarding temperature-controlled transport; this had also been brought to the attention of the UN Sub-committee of Experts on the Transport of Dangerous Goods (TDG). The joint paper felt that reference to cargo transport units should be included in 7.1.7.4.7 and that the use of thermal insulation should be mentioned in 7.1.7.4.5.

After discussion by the Working Party, it was felt that more work was needed on the first part of the proposal, but after an informal document from the UK it was agreed to amend 7.1.7.4.5, with the replacement of “Thermal insulation” by “Vehicle or container with thermal insulation” at the beginning of sub-paragraphs (c), (d) and (e).

TRANSPORT IN TUNNELS Germany arrived with three papers proposing changes to the tunnel codes. The first sought a further change to 5.4.1.1.1(k), following a decision at the 106th session to mention that the “(-)” shown in column (15) of the Dangerous Goods List against UN 3077, 1043, 2814, 2900, 2919, 3077, 3082, 3166, 3171, 3291, 3331, 3359 should be indicated in the transport document so that inspection authorities can decide whether a load bearing an orange-coloured plate is permitted to pass through tunnels. Germany felt that

THE PROPER SHIPPING NAME FOR HYDROGEN

such an entry would be incorrect in the case of substances assigned to UN 2919 or 3331, for which tunnel restrictions could be determined in the context of special arrangements described in 1.7.4 and 1.9.5.3.6.

There was no opposition to the idea but it was felt that the solution offered was perhaps too complex; on the basis of an informal document from Switzerland it was decided to add at the end of 5.4.1.1.1(k) the words “or as specified in a special arrangement in accordance with 1.7.4.2”.

Germany’s second paper on the topic dealt specifically with tunnel restrictions for radioactive materials in excepted packages (UN 2908 to 2911), which are exempted from the orange-coloured plate marking requirements. It seemed, therefore, logical that they should not have a tunnel code assigned. The Working Party decided to defer a decision on this and, meanwhile, ask the secretariat to find out the methodology used to assign tunnel codes to these entries.

The third paper from Germany sought some clarification on the application of the tunnel restriction code for the carriage of empty packagings, uncleaned, for which, it argued, it is not possible to unambiguously assign a tunnel restriction code. The Working Party agreed that this needed work but pointed out the issues that may arise in the carriage of packagings that last contained dangerous goods with a tunnel code ‘0’ and that a tunnel code has been assigned to UN 3509 empty packagings. Germany may present a revised proposal at a future session.

Switzerland also had the idea of amending the wording of 1.1.3.6.4 so as to clarify the applicability of the tunnel code requirements for mixed loads containing UN 3077 or 3082. It was felt the proposal as it stood may have unintended consequences for other substances and the proposal was withdrawn, though it may return in a revised form.

Switzerland returned to a topic it had raised at the previous two sessions, namely the marking of transport units and containers loaded with dangerous goods in limited quantities. Once more this surrounded the need for orange-coloured plates and the inconsistency this causes when travelling through tunnels. It was felt that the solution Switzerland proposed would not solve the problem and, while the secretariat came up with an alternative, no consensus could be reached. The Working Party invited Switzerland to come up with a better solution and, noting that the issue had been rattling round for a while now, encouraged other delegations to forward their comments in writing so that, with luck, a resolution can be achieved at the next meeting.

OTHER PROPOSALS Austria proposed clarification of the rules for the transport of battery-electric vehicles and hybrids as loads, saying that special provision 667(b)(ii) uses vague terms that are open to interpretation. Its paper included a proposed Note to be added under that sub-paragraph to make it clearer how to apply the provisions. »

Several delegations felt this was an issue for the Joint Meeting to consider, since SP 667 is common to RID, ADR and ADN. The Working Party also noted that work was under way within the European Automobile Manufacturers Association (ACEA) on the conditions and procedures for managing the exchange of damaged or expired batteries of electric vehicles; it will be kept appraised of progress of that work. Meanwhile, Austria may return with a revised proposal.

The secretariat felt that the new second paragraph to 9.1.3.4 that appears in the 2021 edition of ADR meant that consequential textual amendments were necessary and also that it could be re-written for clarity. As it turned out, the textual amendments had already been taken care of and rather than change the recently adopted text, the Working Party agreed a new text for the final paragraph: However, these provisions shall not mean that tank inspections have to be carried out at intervals shorter than those laid down in Chapters 6.8, 6.9 and 6.10.

A brief paper from Spain proposed the deletion of special provision V6, which had been removed from RID as long ago as 2007 and which no longer applies to any entries in ADR’s Dangerous Goods List. The Working Party agreed that this must be an error and deleted the provision.

INTERPRETATION OF ADR Turkey returned to an issue it had raised earlier, seeking information on the construction and testing requirements for means of segregation to comply with note ‘a’ to the table in 7.5.2.2 on the carriage of explosives of compatibility groups B and D in the same vehicle.

There was a difference of opinion on the matter; some delegations were in favour of starting work to introduce specifications, while others felt that it would be difficult to reach a harmonised position in view of the different possible configurations. It was also noted that the informal working group for the clarification of 9.3.4.2 on the construction of EX/III vehicles is no longer active and cannot take up the work. Ireland noted that it relies on the specifications in the Institute of Makers of Explosives’ (IME) Recommendations for the Safe Transportation of Detonators in a Vehicle with Certain Other Explosive Materials, and that this might serve as a basis for future work.

The Council on Safe Transportation of Hazardous Articles (COSTHA) said it found 7.5.2.3, dealing with mixed loading, ambiguous. It noted that the paragraph appears to be a combination of the old marginals 10 405 and 11 405, with the latter applicable only to Class 1 explosives, and that their combination is confusing. Those delegations that responded said that there are no known implementation problems but COSTHA was invited to continue discussions with the UN TDG Sub-committee’s Working Group on Explosives, which could lead to further changes.

Switzerland raised an issue in the distribution of petroleum products that has emerged during roadside checks. It invited the Working Party to consider whether the term “offered for carriage” in 5.4.1.1.1 refers to the quantity of dangerous goods present on board the vehicle at the start of the carriage or to the quantity of dangerous goods remaining in the vehicle, for example, at the time of an inspection.

The Working Party confirmed that the information on the total quantity of each dangerous good included in the transport document(s) carried on board, in accordance with 5.4.1.1.1(f), should make it possible to assess the quantity present in the vehicle at a given moment, for example during an inspection.

Germany raised a question about the carriage of flammable wastes in vacuumoperated tanks and, in particular, the provisions in 6.10.3.8(b). Its lengthy informal paper set out the problems it felt exist and offered a solution in terms of additional text for 9.7.8.2 on the location of and relevant standards for non-electrical equipment. After discussions, Germany said a revised proposal would be put to the Joint Meeting.

Sweden noted that the packing group II entry for wastes assigned to UN 3291 was removed in the 2021 editions of ADR, RID and

THERE ARE STILL ISSUES WITH THE ASSIGNMENT

ADN. Until then, it was covered in the table in 1.1.3.6.3 but, since the introductory sentence of that refers specifically to packing group II material, it no longer covers UN 3291. Was this intentional? If not, it should be mentioned in that table. The Working Party confirmed that, as UN 3291 is assigned to transport category 2, it should be covered by the table in 1.1.3.6.3 and decided to add a new row after “Class 6.1” for Class 6.2, with a specific mention of UN 3291.

Three informal papers, from Sweden, Norway and the secretariat, queried the amended security provision S1 (6) that appears in the 2021 edition of ADR; it would appear that supervision is not required, since 1.10.3 does not apply. The Working Party noted that the list of Class 1 articles to which 1.10.1, 1.10.2 and 1.10.3 apply could benefit from a review.

The secretariat also felt that UN 0512 and 0513 should perhaps have been included in S1 (6) and that UN 0511 should probably be added to the list in 1.10.4. A submission will be made to the Joint Meeting.

Germany returned to its earlier question about the applicability of 9.2.1.1 concerning the electrical equipment of vehicles and, in particular, the relevant date of registration of the vehicle. In another informal document, the Netherlands offered its observations on the question. The Working Party invited the two delegations to work together on an official paper for the next session.

OTHER BUSINESS Cefic submitted two informal documents on the stability of tank vehicles, comparing the ADR provisions in 9.7.5 with those in UN Regulation No 111. The Working Party

decided to set up an informal working group, to be led by Cefic, to try to answer the questions raised.

Spain drew the Working Party’s attention to a paper submitted to the UN TDG Sub-committee by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), detailing some inconsistencies between the 21st revised edition of the UN Model Regulations and the 2018 edition of the IAEA Regulations for the Safe Transport of Radioactive Material. The 2021 edition of ADR is based on the 21st revised edition of the UN Model Regulation and therefore contains the same inconsistencies. Chief among these is the leakage test for low specific activity radioactive material (LSA-III), which has been eliminated from the IAEA Regulations but still exists in ADR.

Noting that the TDG Sub-committee had been informed and is likely to make the necessary changes, the Working Party suggested that Spain initiate multilateral agreements once the TDG Sub-committee has adopted the amendments.

The Netherlands noted that, with the recent increase in the volume of hydrogen being transported, it has been receiving a lot of questions about the carriage of hydrogen in equipment. It offered two examples, which result in different treatment through the application of ADR requirements, and noted that it seems strange that there are no requirements for machinery fuelled by hydrogen. The Working Party took note of the comments, which may well presage further work in this area.

The Working Party is due to hold its 109th meeting from 3 to 7 May 2021.

DISCUSSIONS WILL CONTINUE ON THE DESIGN OF

VEHICLES CARRYING MIXED LOADS OF EXPLOSIVES

AND VACUUM-OPERATED TANKS FOR THE CARRIAGE