All the talks from the Labeline roadshow

ON THE ROAD AGAIN

REPORT • BRINGING REGULATORY UPDATES TO THE REGULATED, LABELINE’S BIENNIAL ROADSHOW DELIVERED THE GOODS AT HEATHROW AND MANCHESTER IN NOVEMBER

THOSE WHO HAVE to observe the various regulations that cover the transport of dangerous goods by all modes are – or, at least, should be – aware that those regulations change every two years. This biennial cycle and the lengthy process involved in amending the rules mean that stakeholders should be well placed to maintain compliance when the change does arrive.

Nevertheless, there are those who still seem surprised by the change. To help them, various training providers and other knowledgeable organisations provide support in one way or another. And, for the last two biennial changes, dutyholders in the UK have been able to take advantage of an initiative by Labeline International, supported by HCB, to bring regulatory experts to industry in a series of one-day seminars.

Last year’s Biennial Roadshow made two stops: first at Heathrow on 13 November and then at Manchester Airport two days later. Both days were introduced by Richard Shreeve, sales director at Labeline International, and chaired by HCB’s editorin-chief, Peter Mackay. A panel of experts, including two from North America, discussed the 2019 regulatory changes, the reasons behind them, and the places where they thought industry might have issues with compliance.

Both days began with a light-hearted look at the evolution of dangerous goods transport regulations, featuring the industry’s very own Laurel and Hardy – Jeff Hart OBE, formerly head of the Dangerous Goods Division at the UK Department for Transport (DfT), and Geoff Leach, formerly head of the UK Civil Aviation Authority’s (CAA) Dangerous Goods Office and chair of the International Civil Aviation Organisation’s (ICAO) Dangerous Goods Panel, and now an independent consultant.

WHERE THEY COME FROM Geoff and Jeff started by asking the question: why do we need all this regulation? “Isn’t it obvious?” said Jeff: accidents do happen and rules need to be in place to properly manage the risks inherent in the movement of dangerous goods. Also, setting common minimum standards facilitates international and multimodal transport. They showed some early attempts at regulation, such as the UK’s Explosives Act 1875 and Petroleum (Consolidation) Act 1928, both of which included provisions specific to transport.

The UN Model Regulations – the ‘Orange Book’ – were first published just over 60 years ago, so the system is now well established. The speakers reminded delegates how its provisions filter down into the rules they have to work with: the ICAO Technical Instructions,

PROPER HAZARD COMMUNICATION IS CRUCIAL TO THE

the International Maritime Dangerous Goods (IMDG) Code, and RID, ADR and ADN for surface transport in Europe.

All these rulebooks were about to change from the start of 2019, although their use would become mandatory at different times. The ICAO Technical Instructions – and the International Air Transport Association’s (IATA) Dangerous Goods Regulations – have been mandatory since 00.01 on 1 January 2019; there is a one-year transition for the IMDG Code Amendment 39-19, which may be used now but will not be mandatory until 1 January 2020; and in Europe there is a six-month transition period for RID/ADR/ADN, with use of the 2019 versions becoming mandatory as from 1 July 2019.

A subsequent panel session, involving Jeff Hart, Geoff Leach, Richard Masters (formerly with container line MSC) and USbased trainer and consultant Gene Sanders, looked in more detail at the 2019 changes, beginning with those that are common to all modes. These derive from the 20th revised edition of the UN Model Regulations, adopted in December 2016. There are changes in all Chapters, but those that are most obvious are the use of the word ‘hazard’ instead of ‘risk’ throughout, and the arrival of a number of new UN entries for articles containing dangerous goods, nos, in the various classes/divisions.

BY AIR AND SEA Geoff Leach looked in more detail at the changes in the ICAO Technical Instructions. The format of the Shipper’s Declaration has been changed, and there is no longer any requirement for the title of the signatory and the place of signing to be shown. A long transitional period has been given to allow stocks of old forms to be used up. A new item on the Notification to Captain (NOTOC) is the date: this is such an obvious omission one has to wonder if there was a point to it not being there.

There is a new entry in the List of Dangerous Goods, ID8001, for disilane, with a note that it is forbidden for carriage by air.. Special provision A807 highlights that UN 1954 and 3151 must not be used for disilane or other pyrophoric gases. Elsewhere, packing instruction 459 has been amended with new provisions for the packing of very small amounts of UN 3223 and 3224 self-reactive and polymerising substances and an outer packaging table has been added to align with the UN provisions. There is also an exemption from the segregation and cargo aircraft accessibility requirements for UN 3528 engines and machinery powered by flammable liquid.

There was a longer list of amendments in the IMDG Code, as enumerated by Jeff Hart. Some of these derived from the explosion aboard the MSC Flaminia in 2012, which was caused by the polymerisation of divinyl benzene in two tank containers carried in the hold. The maritime industry is concerned that information about cargoes that have the potential to spontaneously polymerise or self-ignite is available to all parties along the supply chain, so when goods are shipped under temperature control, the words ‘TEMPERATURE CONTROLLED’ will now have to be added after the proper shipping name. Shippers need to be aware that carriers may well demand some form of mechanical temperature control for such shipments.

Another significant change in Amendment 39-18 of the IMDG Code is the introduction of segregation group (SGG) codes to column (16b) of the Dangerous Goods List. These have been designed to help those in charge of stowage plans by indicating the type of product involved. For instance, a product’s segregation (SG) code may say ‘stow away from acids’; the SGG code now indicates whether a product is an acid, which may not be immediately obvious from the chemical name. »

Other new items in the IMDG Code include provisions for IMO Type 9 tanks, or ‘road gas element vehicles’ – these are referred to in other regulations as ‘multiple-element gas containers’ (MEGCs) or, in the US, as ‘tube trailers’. The IMDG Code now includes operational provisions at 4.2.6 and design, construction and approval provisions at 6.8.3.4.

Jeff rounded up is presentation by highlighting the daunting frequency of fires aboard ships – there is one major incident every two months and they do not often make the headlines. “The cause is rarely the ship,” he said. “The seeds of the incident are usually sown on land. IMDG training for short-based staff is vital. It is the only way to prevent these terrible events.”

ROAD WORKS AHEAD The amendments in the 2019 edition of ADR are many and various, as Richard Masters enumerated. In the exemption threshold table in 1.1.3.6, it is clarified that articles are calculated as the gross weight of the article less any packaging; and when documenting goods to which 1.1.3.6 exemptions may be applied, Note 1 to 5.4.1.1.1(f) now requires the calculated value of each Transport Category to be shown in addition to the total quantity.

A clarification to 1.4.2.2.2 indicates that the carrier may rely on a vehicle packing certificate to certify that there are no defects in the container or vehicle. New tunnel codes have been assigned to the new engines and machinery entries (UN 3528 to 3530), with details of exemptions found in special provision 363.

In common with the IMDG Code, a new section 7.1.7 sets out procedures for the carriage of temperature-controlled selfreactive or polymerising substances, replacing the existing arrangements; special provision 386 is modified for alignment. There are also a number of changes in Chapter 5 on marking, labelling and placarding, including some clarification on the use of GHS pictograms. Placards are no longer required for exempted shipments of UN 3077/3082 environmentally hazardous substances when in packages of less than 5 kg/litres.

Flammable corrosive gases have been added to the list of high consequence dangerous goods in the table at 1.10.3.1.2. The ‘FC’ classification code is added to applicable chemicals under pressure. There is a new ADR tank provision, TU42, which restricts the carriage of corrosive substances to those with a pH value between 5 and 8. This is applied to specified substances and to UN 3264 and 3266 corrosive liquids, acidic/basic, inorganic, nos.

A quick survey of the audience at the events showed a surprisingly large proportion who were involved in some way with transport to and from the US, so it was fortunate that Labeline had managed to get Gene Sanders over from Florida to explain what is going on there. Those who follow regulatory developments in Washington, DC will know that things changed very quickly after President Trump came to power, with an immediate freeze on all new rulemakings and, subsequently, instructions to reduce the burden of regulation. The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) has since then had to fight much harder to get rules put in place to harmonise US provisions with those in effect in international transport, even though such harmonisation actually saves industry money.

At the time of the Labeline meetings, the 2019 harmonisation rule, HM-215O, was still a faint dot on the horizon; Gene said at the time that it would probably not appear until after January 2019, although subsequently PHMSA published its notice of proposed rulemaking at the end of November (see page 50). Gene also highlighted the sunset provision PHMSA gave to the existing requirements for polymerising substances, predicting accurately that this would be extended.

BATTERIES AND SHEETS As ever, there was a presentation on lithium batteries but there is no one better equipped than Geoff Leach to give it, as he chaired the ICAO Dangerous Goods Panel through the period when the rules were being established. There is clearly frustration building among the regulated community at the frequency with which the rules change, and regulators probably feel the same way. As it stands, the regulations seem to please no one – especially as it seems that most accidents involving lithium batteries in transport feature batteries that have not been manufactured or packaged to the expected standards.

Regulators are now trying to take a different, hazard-based approach. As part of this effort, the SAE Aerospace G-27 Committee is trying to develop a packaging

PRESENTATIONS RANGED ACROSS THE MODES AND

performance standard, which is currently on its fifth draft. This describes the test requirements to demonstrate that a package as prepared for transport does not present an unacceptable risk. Testing is designed to identify hazards from smoke, flammable gases and explosion when a cell in the package is forced into thermal runaway. It is intended that the standard will be extended with a test to identify ‘benign’ lithium cells and batteries – those that can be shown not to present a significant hazard when forced into thermal runaway. It will also include provisions for ‘generic’ packagings that can be used to prevent the spread of a hazard in the event of a thermal runaway.

This has been a lengthy process already and it will be some time yet – and a lot more testing – before the Committee is in a position to vote on the standard. And even when it is adopted, it will still have to be considered by a number of ICAO panels. Geoff said it is unlikely that the standard would be ready before 2021.

Gene Sanders returned to the podium with a presentation on the use of safety data sheets (SDSs) in the transport chain. Air carriers often use the SDS to check the classification of goods and the practice is spreading in the road mode, he said. If there is a mis-match it can result in the delay or rejection of shipments, timewasting and unhappy customers. In some cases there are referrals to enforcement agencies.

This is not the point of the SDS and it is important to remember that product classification in the Globally Harmonised System of classification and labelling of chemicals (GHS), which is where the SDS format is described, does not always match classification in the transport regulations. Gene gave several examples where the two systems diverge, including one interesting case where a self-reactive liquid is assigned in the Model Regulations to Division 4.1 – flammable solid, while under GHS it should bear the ‘bomb’ pictogram and is described as a liquid. Furthermore, the transport regulations are not based solely on criteria: they vary by mode, by size and by origin and destination, so there can be no direct correlation between the transport provisions in Section 14 of the SDS and the GHS classification in other sections. Gene reminded the audience that anyone who completes Section 14 is required to have training in classifying dangerous goods for transport.

SEE YOU IN TWO YEARS There was plenty more for delegates to get their teeth into during the Labeline seminars. Herman Teering introduced the DGOffice approach to e-freight in the dangerous goods sector (see page 44); Richard Masters and Gene Sanders considered the consequences of the MSC Flaminia accident; Bill Diesslin of the Institute of Hazardous Materials Management (IHMM) introduced the Certified Dangerous Goods Professional accreditation; and Caroline Raine of the National Chemical Emergency Centre (NCEC) ran through the various modal provisions relating to the transport of dangerous goods in limited quantities.

The seminars’ chair would like to apologise to those who attended the Heathrow event, which overran its timetable quite considerably; those who were at the Manchester event two days later were able to get away on time after some speakers had been shown the yellow card.

But the feedback from delegates and sponsors was overwhelmingly positive. In some ways it is a shame that the Biennial Roadshow will not be back until November 2020. HCB will make sure industry is aware of it before it happens; alternatively, keep an eye on the Labeline website, www.labeline.com, for early announcements. HCB