[ID] => 7770
[post_author] => 34
[post_date] => 2017-03-09 10:33:52
[post_date_gmt] => 2017-03-09 10:33:52
[post_content] => The European Commission for Europe’s (ECE) Working Party on the Transport of Dangerous Goods (WP15) held its 101st session in Geneva on 8 to 10 November 2016. The meeting’s aim was to tidy up the final corrections to the 2017 text of ADR and to embark on the amendments that will appear in the 2019 text.
The meeting was chaired by JA Franco (Portugal) with Ariane Roumier (France) acting as vice-chair. It was attended by representatives of 26 of the 49 Contracting Parties to the ADR Agreement, including Georgia, which had acceded to the Agreement in September 2016. Representatives from Algeria, Jordan and Tunisia also attended, the latter as a full member. The European Union (EU), the Intergovernmental Organisation for International Carriage by Rail (OTIF), four non-governmental organisations and the EuroMed project were also represented.
As seems inevitable at any meeting of WP15, the 14 countries that have not yet ratified or acceded to the Protocol of Amendment of 1993 were urged to do so.
WORK OF THE JOINT MEETING
The Working Party reviewed the corrections proposed by the Joint Meeting of RID/ADR/ADN experts at its autumn 2016 session and other corrections proposed by the Secretariat to correct discrepancies between the various official language versions of ADR. Taking the view that none of these corrections was substantive in nature, all were adopted and the Secretariat was urged to public a corrigendum as soon as possible. Those changes applicable to the English language version can be found here: https://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/trans/danger/publi/adr/adr2017/ECE-TRANS-257-Corr1e_provisional.pdf.
The Working Party also reviewed some decisions taken by the Joint Meeting on amendments for the 2019 text, which were also adopted. These include the following.
Packagings, including IBCs and large packagings, marked in accordance with 6.1.3, 126.96.36.199, 188.8.131.52, 184.108.40.206, 220.127.116.11, 6.3.4, 6.5.2 or 6.6.3 but which were approved in a country which is not Contracting Party to ADR may nevertheless be used for carriage under ADR.
- Addition of a new Note under the heading of Chapter 4.1:
Flexible bulk containers marked in accordance with 18.104.22.168 but which were approved in a country which is not a Contracting Party to ADR may nevertheless be used for carriage under ADR.
- Deletion of 22.214.171.124.
- Addition of a new Note under the heading of 126.96.36.199:
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 188.8.131.52 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 184.108.40.206 are fulfilled.
- Addition of a new Note after the first paragraph of 220.127.116.11:
PROPOSALS FOR AMENDMENT
The Netherlands argued that the table in 18.104.22.168 was missing a link to 9.2.7 for FL and AT vehicles and that this should have been updated as part of the 2017 text. The Working Party agreed and asked for this to be part of the corrigendum. The Netherlands had also proposed a change to the transitional provision alongside the entry but the Working Party felt this should be the subject of a separate proposal at a coming session.
The Netherlands also proposed the inclusion of a transitional provision for EX/III vehicles for Class 1 substances, which was accepted for inclusion in the 2019 text:
22.214.171.124 Certificates of approval for EX/III vehicles intended for the carriage of explosive substances in tanks in compliance with the requirements of 126.96.36.199 applicable up to 31 December 2018 issued before 1 July 2019 not containing the remark concerning the compliance with 9.7.9 may continue to be used until the next annual technical inspection of the vehicle.
A future meeting will discuss whether a similar transitional provision should be included for mobile explosives manufacturing units (MEMUs).
Norway arrived with a proposal to extend the fastening requirements in 9.7.3 to vehicles carrying multiple-element gas containers (MEGCs) and tanks other than demountable tanks, and to include a definition for the minimum stresses the fastenings should be designed to handle. The idea received broad support but some delegations felt the proposed text could be improved. A new document will be presented at the next session and the Norwegian delegate invited other experts to send comments.
Sweden felt that, when goods are carried in accordance with 188.8.131.52, it would make life easier all round if the total quantity and calculated value/transport category were to be shown on the transport document and proposed amendments to the relevant parts of 184.108.40.206 and 220.127.116.11.1(f). The proposal was supported by the International Road Transport Union (IRU), which reported that interpretation of 18.104.22.168.1(f) poses problems for those transport companies whose drivers are not familiar with ADR.
There was some support for the idea, although Sweden felt it necessary to present a revised version of the proposal to take into account a number of comments that had been made.
Switzerland proposed deleting 22.214.171.124.3(f) on the grounds that the prohibition on the mixed loading of ammonium nitrate emulsions of UN 3375 and blasting explosives on MEMUs had been removed in the text of ADR 2017. However, some delegations said they wished to maintain all the provisions relating to mixed loading on MEMUs in 126.96.36.199.3 without it being necessary to refer to 7.5.2. The proposal was withdrawn.
The UK reported that it had been made aware of increasing levels of double manning on vehicles carrying dangerous goods; while a vehicle legally has only one driver at a time, the second person in the cab is still a “crew member” and can be used in loading and unloading operations. However, this means that the provisions of Chapter 7.5, which only refers to the driver, are out of sync with the security provisions in Chapter 1.10. To resolve this, the UK proposed to include reference to crew members in the checks set out in 188.8.131.52 and 184.108.40.206. The Working Party agreed and included these changes in the corrigendum to the 2017 text.
The Secretariat noted the publication of the new IMO/ILO/UNECE Code of Practice for Packing of Cargo Transport Units (CTU Code) and the fact that it is already referenced in 220.127.116.11 relating to the loading of flexible bulk containers and in footnote 5 to 5.4.2. The Working Party was invited to consider whether footnote 1 to 18.104.22.168 should also be amended to include a reference to relevant chapters of the CTU Code. The idea received general support and the Secretariat was asked to work up a formal proposal for the next session.
In an informal document Switzerland noted that the Joint Meeting had adopted an amendment to specify that lithium cells and batteries in scope of special provision 636(b) could be mixed with non-lithium cells or batteries; this had already featured in the 2015 text of RID, ADR and ADN but when the amended text of SP 636 was adopted for the 2017 text it was not included. The Secretariat, however, recalled that the Joint Meeting had in fact reversed that decision; if the Working Party wished to go back to the former text it would require another amendment rather than a correction as Switzerland proposed. The Swiss representative withdrew the proposal.
Spain floated the idea of increasing the maximum amount of explosive substance authorised per transport unit, specifically referring to the current 16 tonne limit for EX/III vehicles. The limits have been in place since 1968, Spain reported in an informal document, which also took an interesting risk evaluation approach to the issue. Several delegations asked for more time to study the proposal and the Spanish representative offered to prepare a formal proposal for the next session.
INTERPRETATION OF ADR
IRU summarised a problem arising from a new law in Poland that requires that the name and address of the owner of dangerous goods is included in the transport document handed over to the carrier. Non-observance of the law can result in a fine and a prohibition on carrying out operations in Poland. The EU representative noted that several member states have filed complaints about the law and that and official procedure is already under way. The Working Party expressed regret at this obstacle to international trade.
The Polish representative explained that the law is designed to combat black market transport of certain dangerous goods and is not related to safety issues. However, the Polish government has already taken note of the problems reported and is looking for a better solution. Indeed, the ECE Secretariat has since received a communication from the Ministry of Infrastructure and Construction of Poland stating that it has recommended to enforcement agencies that they do not punish carriers in case of violation.
Switzerland sought delegates’ opinions on the interpretation of special provision 601, which applies to pharmaceutical products (medicines) ready for use. Prior to 2007, the marginal included reference to “packagings of a type intended for retail sale…” and the original proposed text for SP601 maintained this wording; however, it was then removed from the final text.
This change can be interpreted as meaning that SP601 does not only apply to medicines packed in packagings intended for retail sale or distribution but also to medicines not packed in packagings but which are still “intended for sale or distribution”. Switzerland noted that, at least in the case of wastes, multilateral special agreement M287 seems to presuppose that SP601 only applies in the former case.
Both Austria and the European Chemical Industry Council (Cefic) reported that as far as they are concerned SP601 only applies to products packed in retail packaging. This may presage a proposal for a revision to the text of SP601 at a coming session, probably at Joint Meeting level.
Romania sought delegates’ thoughts on the need to include a reference to 8.2.3 in Chapters 3.4 and 3.5. The issue relates to the exemption from the training requirements in Chapter 1.3 for dangerous goods packed in limited or excepted quantities. Some delegations felt the issue was sufficiently clear while others thought it would be consistent to make the reference. Again, this may return as a formal proposal.
Finland highlighted the repeal of EN 471, the standard that covers warning vests. It has been replaced by EN ISO 20471 on test methods and requirements for high visibility clothing and the Working Party was invited to change the reference in 22.214.171.124. Furthermore, the new standard differentiates between garments that cover only the torso – vests, tabards, etc – and those that cover the torso and arms; Finland suspected that ADR did not mean to limit the type of clothing to be worn by using the term ‘warning vest’ and suggested ‘warning clothing’ might be more appropriate.
The Working Party agreed with the proposal to change the reference, which will appear in the 2019 text. It also agreed with Finland’s point about ‘warning vest’ and invited a formal proposal for the next session.
The Working Party welcomed a presentation on the EuroMed project, an EU-funded initiative to help improve road traffic standards in north Africa and the Near East. One aspect of the project is to harmonise national and international regulations along European lines, including those covering the transport of dangerous goods. Indeed, Algeria, Israel and Jordan are working hard on adopting the ADR Agreement and are looking to accede in the near future.
A series of workshops has been run in the region looking at road safety, vehicle regulations, facilitating transborder transport and the carriage of dangerous goods and perishable goods. ADR training was held in Jordan in October 2013, in Algeria in April 2014 and in Israel in May 2014. A workshop to raise awareness of ADR was held in Cairo in May 2016 and train-the-trainer workshops took place in Tunisia and Jordan in 2015 and 2016.
OTIF reported on the decisions taken by the Organisation for Cooperation of Railways’ (OSJD) Group of Experts at its meeting in Warsaw in October 2016 affecting Annex 2 of SMGS; since 2012 OSJD and OTIF have been making efforts to harmonise Annex 2 with RID. However, at the October meeting Russia firmly objected to the use of EU directives and EN standards in SMGS and, indeed, proposed that existing references should in the future be deleted.
When it came to vote on adopting amendments to Annex 2 of SMGS, which would keep its provisions in line with RID, it proved impossible to reach unanimity, which is required under the principles of OSJD. As such, the proposed amendments were rejected and the 2015 text remains in force. This will have negative consequences for rail transport between the RID and OSJD areas and OTIF highlighted the particular problem that will be posed for the transport of internal combustion engines from the EU to assembly plants in Russia. It also puts the regulations for rail transport out of step with those for road transport, as there has been no similar objection to the ADR changes for 2017.
OTIF has proposed to convene a further meeting of the OSJD Commission for Transport Law and the Working Party hoped that this could help to find a way to limit the differences that will otherwise exist.
Germany reported on two transport accidents, one involving molten aluminium (UN 3257) and the other mercury (UN 2809). The Working Party was particularly concerned at the failure of the containers used in the transport of molten aluminium and asked the German representative to keep it informed of progress in the investigation.
Another accident report from Germany, this involving a tank vehicle carrying liquefied oxygen that was rear-ended by another vehicle, raised the issue of rear protection of vehicles. However, several delegations felt that the limited number of incidents of this type did not justify further discussion of rear protection. The German representative was invited to provide additional information.
The 102nd session of WP15 will take place on 8 to 12 May; a report on that meeting will appear in a forthcoming issue of HCB.
[post_title] => ADR: Road to Cairo
[post_status] => publish
[comment_status] => open
[ping_status] => open
[post_name] => adr-road-cairo
[post_modified] => 2017-03-09 10:34:42
[post_modified_gmt] => 2017-03-09 10:34:42
[post_parent] => 0
[guid] => https://www.hcblive.com/?p=7770
[menu_order] => 0
[post_type] => post
[comment_count] => 0
[filter] => raw