[ID] => 9095
[post_author] => 34
[post_date] => 2018-01-29 09:50:22
[post_date_gmt] => 2018-01-29 09:50:22
[post_content] => The autumn 2017 session of the Joint Meeting of the Joint Meeting of the RID Committee of Experts and the Working Party on the Transport of Dangerous Goods (WP15) of the UN Economic Commission for Europe (ECE) was held in Geneva from 19 to 29 September. It was chaired by Claude Pfauvadel (France) with Helmut Rein (Germany) as vice-chair.
The meeting was attended by representatives of 22 states, an observer from the Democratic Republic of Congo, the European Commission, the EU Agency for Railways (ERA), the Central Commission for the Navigation of the Rhine (CCNR), the Organisation for Cooperation between Railways (OSJD) and 11 non-governmental organisations.
An extensive agenda aimed to discuss, as far as possible, all the main changes that will appear in the 2019 editions of the RID, ADR and ADN regulations. Agenda items relating to transport in tanks, revised standards and harmonisation with the UN Model Regulations were discussed by their respective working groups, as detailed in the first part of this report (HCB February 2018, page 60). Discussions in plenary then moved on to a number of proposals for changes to the regulatory texts.
The International Union of Railways (UIC) continued with its efforts to extend the weather-resistance provisions, currently applicable to orange-coloured plates, to hazard warning placards and other marks. Its paper explained that adverse weather conditions, headwinds and the length of transport chains involving a rail leg often lead to these placards and marks becoming detached from the tank.
After discussion and some revisions, the Joint Meeting adopted additional text at the end of 126.96.36.199.1 (for placards) and at the end of the second paragraph of 5.3.3 (for marks). The text added to 188.8.131.52.1 reads:
The placards shall be weather-resistant and shall ensure durable marking throughout the entire journey.
France sought an extension to 30 June 2021 of the transitional provision relating to the new requirement in 184.108.40.206.1.1 for the width of the line inside the edge forming the diamond to be 2 mm. This had been raised at an earlier meeting and also at the July 2017 session of the UN Sub-committee of Experts on the transport of dangerous goods (TDG). The Joint Meeting agreed with the proposal and invited WP15 and the RID Committee of Experts to do the same, on the understanding that this might have to be revisited at the March 2018 session of the Joint Meeting.
Switzerland considered that the first paragraph of special provision 666 is too complicated and unnecessarily long, in view of the fact that it applies only to UN 3166 and 3171. The Joint Meeting agreed with the comment, if not the text offered in the Swiss paper. Instead they adopted the following revised first paragraph for SP 666:
Vehicles and battery powered equipment, referred to by special provision 388, when carried as a load, as well as any dangerous goods they contain that are necessary for their operation or the operation of their equipment, are not subject to any other provisions of RID/ADR/ADN, provided the following conditions are met:
Sweden felt there was a lack of information about the language to be used on marks on packages; this is addressed in respect of documentation in 220.127.116.11.1 but, despite the various different marks that have crept into the regulations, primarily for safety reasons, there is a lack of instruction on what language(s) they should use.
The Joint Meeting acknowledged the safety issue but could foresee problems if such marks had to be in all the languages through which an international consignment might move. The Swedish representative offered to present a revised proposal, taking into account the comments received.
Germany proposed adding flammable corrosive gases of Class 2 to the list of high consequence dangerous goods in Table 18.104.22.168.2. That Table lists flammable gases of Class 2 in quantities of more than 3,000 litres in tanks and it was unclear why flammable corrosive gases should not be treated the same. After clarifying that this proposal did not relate to non-toxic gases, the Joint Meeting adopted the change. The first line for Class 2 in that Table is amended to read:
Flammable, non-toxic gases (classification codes including only letters F or FC)
Another paper from Germany addressed a tricky issue relating to the marking of cargo transport units (CTUs). According to 22.214.171.124, CTUs containing packages with substances of Classes 1 to 9 that have environmentally hazardous properties as well as other hazards (i.e. not UN 3077 and 3082) still have to bear the environmentally hazardous mark, although the packages themselves do not have to be so marked. This seems inconsistent and is also at odds with the provisions of the International Maritime Dangerous Goods (IMDG) Code.
Although there was some opposition, particularly on the grounds that removal of the mark might have an impact on local water protection measures, the proposal was adopted on a vote with a large majority. The solution to the problem is to add at the end of 126.96.36.199:
This does not apply to the exceptions listed in 188.8.131.52.1.
Austria sought clarification of the meaning of ‘gross mass’, found inter alia
in the definition of maximum total quantity in 184.108.40.206.3. Its paper noted that this probably meant the mass of the articles but, as it stands, it seems to indicate that the mass of the packaging is also included, especially as the same paragraph refers to ‘net mass’ in terms of explosive substances.
The Joint Meeting entertained the proposal but baulked at including the proposed reference to ‘handling devices’. It was made clear that handling devices for which provision is made in the packing instructions should not be taken into account for the calculation of the gross mass, unlike devices attached to the articles, such as handles. (This argument seems to make it likely that another proposal for clarification will be forthcoming somewhere down the line.)
The result of this is that, in the first indent in the text after the table in 220.127.116.11.3, “gross mass in kilograms” is replaced by “total mass in kilograms of the articles without their packagings”.
The Russian Federation had identified a number of paragraphs that deserved clarification, as it felt they were open to misinterpretation. In some cases, the Joint Meeting felt that the proposed changes should be sent up the line to the UN TDG Sub-committee, as they dealt with text drawn from the UN Model Regulations. One proposal was dealt with by the Working Group on tanks and two more were withdrawn. Two other proposals were adopted:
- 18.104.22.168 was revised to remove cross-references to redundant sub-paragraphs; and
- The wording of 22.214.171.124(b) was amended for clarity.
An informal document from the UK addressed the carriage of prohibited dangerous goods in the mail; it noted that the Royal Mail intercepts some 100,000 postal items containing prohibited dangerous goods every year, of which around 60 per cent are lithium batteries. The UK noted that both the UN Model Regulations and the ICAO Technical Instructions include a reference to the Universal Postal Union (UPU) Convention and Acts and felt that the adoption of a similar reference in RID/ADR would improve modal harmonisation and raise awareness of the restrictions on dangerous goods in the mail.
Several other delegations shared the UK’s concerns. However, it was also noted that the rapid increase in online shopping has meant that a lot of dangerous goods are now being carried by express courier companies, which are not obliged to comply with the UPU Acts. The question thus arose of why such services, which are generally in the private sector, should be placed at an advantage over public sector postal services, when the problem in essence is how to ensure that the transport of dangerous goods, under whatever service, comply with the applicable safety regulations. As such, merely referencing the UPU Acts would have only limited effect. The UK representative promised to take another look at the issue in light of those comments.
Germany felt that the text of 126.96.36.199.1 is being interpreted as applying only to refillable pressure receptacles; in fact it applies equally to non-fillable pressure receptacles. The Joint Meeting agreed and amended the first paragraph to make it clearer:
For refillable pressure receptacles, the conformity assessment of valves and other demountable accessories having a direct safety function may be carried out separately from the pressure receptacles. For non-refillable pressure receptacles, the conformity assessment of valves and other demountable accessories having a direct safety function shall be carried out together with the assessment of the pressure receptacles.
Three papers from the secretariat contained various necessary changes to the texts to update references to external amendments and to amend or delete expired transitional provisions, which were all accepted.
INTERPETATION OF RID/ADR/ADN
Germany sought the Joint Meeting’s opinion of the meaning of ‘equipment used’ in 188.8.131.52 (ADR) and 184.108.40.206 (RID/ADR), in terms of the visual inspection of equipment used in loading and unloading. Should this be taken to refer to all the equipment specified in 8.1.4 and 8.1.5? Opinions differ within Germany as to the extent of the requirement.
The Joint Meeting was split on this issue; some delegations thought that, yes, the provision does apply to all equipment that is or could be used during loading and unloading, including personal protective equipment and fire extinguishers. Others felt that it refers only to the equipment needed to load or unload the goods. There were also questions about who is responsible for carrying out the visual inspection, especially in cases where it is the driver who conducts the unloading operation.
The representative of Germany said a revised proposal would be drawn up, taking into account the comments made.
Romania had spotted that the definition of ‘carriage’ in 1.2.1 includes a mention of the transport document showing “the place of dispatch and the place of reception”. However, 220.127.116.11 requires that the transport document show “(g) the name and address of the consignor; (h) the name and address of the consignee(s)”, which are not necessarily the same as the physical location of dispatch and reception.
The Joint Meeting did not agree that an amendment was necessary; the place of dispatch and place of reception should be deduced from other transport documentation, such as a CIM or CMR consignment note.
France returned to the question of the implications of 1.8.1 for competent authorities, which had been discussed at the previous session. This section aims to replicate in RID and ADR the concept included in article 4(3) of the ADN Agreement, according to which Contracting Parties are bound to monitor the observance of prohibitions of carriage and conditions of carriage.
This is a topic that splits the Joint Meeting; there are those that do not like the idea of obligations being placed on competent authorities, while others feel that it is completely justifiable that competent authorities should check that transport operations starting on their territories meet the provisions of RID/ADR and that those in the countries of transit and destination could also legitimately check on their conformity. Others feared that the provision as proposed could be interpreted as placing an obligation to carry out systematic checks rather than spot checks.
The representative of France promised to go back and have another think about the issue and to return with a revised proposal.
INFORMAL WORKING GROUPS
France reports on the progress of modelling work being done by the National Institute on the Industrial Environment and Hazards (Ineris) in the context of the work of the informal working group on reducing the risk of a boiling liquid evaporating vapour explosion (BLEVE) during the transport of dangerous goods. The Joint Meeting welcomed the progress being made and the usefulness of the modelling tool being used. It asked the informal working group to continue the next session was due to be held in Madrid in February. The Joint Meeting also stressed the need to look at dangerous goods other than LPG that have the potential to generate a BLEVE.
France, Germany and Italy had been making preliminary moves to use the solutions proposed by the informal working group on telematics, decentralising the functions of ‘Trusted Party 1’ (TP1) to accredited bodies, leaving international organisations to manage the list of authorised TP1s rather than get involved in managing the systems themselves. Austria, Belgium, the Netherlands and the UK said they were interested in taking part in the next meeting, due to take place in Bonn in November 2017.
The European LPG Association (AEGPL) reported on the work of the informal working group on alternative methods for periodic inspection of refillable pressure receptacles, which had met in Paris in May 2017. That meeting discussed some of the concerns that had been expressed at the spring Joint Meeting and came up with two specific proposals.
After discussion by the Joint Meeting and some amendments to the proposals, they were adopted. They include a new 18.104.22.168.3, General provisions for the substitution of dedicated check(s) for periodic inspection required in 22.214.171.124.1, which includes sub-sections on non-destructive and destructive testing as alternative methods.
In response to earlier concerns, the informal working group also came up with specific provisions for over-moulded cylinders, including a new 126.96.36.199.4:
Over-moulded cylinders subject to 188.8.131.52.3.1 shall be subject to periodic inspection and test in accordance with special provision 674 of Chapter 3.3.
A new definition is added in 1.2.1:
"Over-moulded cylinder" means a cylinder intended for the carriage of LPG with a water capacity not exceeding 13 litres made of a coated welded steel inner cylinder with an over-moulded protective case made from cellular plastic, which is non-removable and bonded to the outer surface of the steel cylinder wall;
A new special provision 674 deals specifically with the conditions for alternative test methods for over-moulded cylinders, and is assigned in column (6) of the Dangerous Goods List to UN 1011, 1075, 1965, 1969 and 1978.
ERA presented a report on the tenth workshop of the road map on risk management in the context of rail, road and inland waterway transport of dangerous goods, along with details of the second phase of work and an overview of the future framework of guides on risk management. The workshop had finalised a framework guide on risk management, a risk estimation guide, a decision-making guide and a framework glossary. A guide on data was also envisaged, but it had not yet been possible to finalise it.
The ERA representative explained that, once the guides are finished, a second phase might involve the development of a risk calculation engine, if sufficient budget is available.
Some delegations expressed reservations about the scope of the use of the guides and tools in the future; in particular, they did not like the idea of transport operators having to carry out systematic and mandatory preliminary risk analyses based solely on the tools being developed. ERA said that any interested parties would be at liberty to use the guides and their use is not an end in itself; in addition, they will not address Chapter 1.10.
ERA planned to hold a further meeting in October and expected that the text of the guides would be available for the spring 2018 session of the Joint Meeting, at which point it might be able to make a decision on the second phase of work.
The European Industrial Gases Association (EIGA) reported on progress being made towards mutual recognition of pressure receptacle approvals between the US and RID/ADR/ADN contracting parties. The Compressed Gas Association (CGA) had entered a petition for rulemaking with the US Department for Transportation (DOT), which was being considered, and EIGA promised to keep the Joint Meeting updated on the passage of this petition.
The Joint Meeting hoped that these moves would lead to the simultaneous alignment of US regulations and RID/ADR/ADN from the beginning of 2021.
An issue had emerged in respect of corrections to the 2017 texts; at its May 2017 meeting, WP15 had adopted corrections to ADR 2017 on the basis of decisions taken by the Joint Meeting in March 2017. However, the UN Office of Legal Affairs had found that a number of these did not meet the criteria for ‘correction’ as opposed to ‘amendment’. The chair of WP15 submitted proposals for amendment so that those corrections could be adopted as soon as possible. The EU then noted that member states were authorised to accept only “formal and minor” changes to the 2017 texts of ADR and ADN, but not the new amendments that were proposed.
The secretariat reported that, of the 13 proposals grouped together, six had been accepted by the Treaty Section as being corrections; the secretariat felt that another three were corrections but were not urgent. However, three other corrections relating to the transport of radioactive substances, which had been ordered by the UN TDG Sub-committee, were important both from a safety standpoint and for modal harmonisation. Another correction concerning the marking of packages containing lithium cells exempted under SP 188 was also modally significant.
The Joint Meeting noted that there are alternative ways to implement the corrections, including the use of multilateral agreements. However, it did seem desirable for a correction procedure to be available and also that the EU procedures should offer a degree of flexibility when considering corrections or changes to the regulations already in force.
Claude Pfauvadel and Helmut Rein were re-elected as chair and vice-chair, respectively, for the 2018 sessions; Mr Rein, however, announced that he intended to retire during 2018 and that it might be necessary to elect a new vice-chairman for the autumn session.
The next session of the Joint Meeting was due to be held in Bern from 12 to 16 March. A report on that meeting will appear in HCB in due course.
[post_title] => Europe: Next year's model
[post_status] => publish
[comment_status] => open
[ping_status] => open
[post_name] => europe-next-years-model
[post_modified] => 2018-01-29 09:50:22
[post_modified_gmt] => 2018-01-29 09:50:22
[post_parent] => 0
[guid] => https://www.hcblive.com/?p=9095
[menu_order] => 0
[post_type] => post
[comment_count] => 0
[filter] => raw