[ID] => 8990
[post_author] => 34
[post_date] => 2018-01-12 10:48:33
[post_date_gmt] => 2018-01-12 10:48:33
[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.
The main task of the meeting was to discuss and, insofar as was possible, agree the multimodal changes to the regulations to enter into force on 1 January 2019, with the usual six-month transition period to 1 July 2019. Those changes will then need to be discussed and adopted by the respective bodies responsible for the RID (rail), ADR (road) and ADN (inland waterway) regulations. Those regulations apply throughout the EU, in a number of non-EU countries and in various other states. ADR is also being observed by an increasing range of countries outside Europe as a model for their domestic legislation.
As is customary, proposals relating to the transport of dangerous goods in tanks were remitted to a working group that met alongside the plenary under the chairmanship of Arne Bale (UK).
The secretariat highlighted an item in the report of the Ad Hoc Working Group on the Harmonisation of RID/ADR/ADN with the UN Recommendations, which suggested adding a portable tank special provision corresponding to TP10 for the carriage of bromine. This was agreed:
TU43 An empty uncleaned tank may be offered for carriage after the date of expiry of the last inspection of the lining for a period not to exceed three months beyond this date for the purposes of performing the next inspection of the lining prior to refilling (see special provision TT2 in 6.8.4 (d)).
“TU43” is added in column (13) of Table A in 3.2 against UN 1744 bromine. This is also referenced in special provision TT2 in 6.8.4(d).
Special provision TU42 had previously been added to prevent the carriage of substances that react violently with aluminium alloy in tanks with a protective lining or shell made of such alloys. Russia proposed extending its applicability to another UN number but an informal document from Belgium felt that a new approach using classification criteria for corrosivity rather than a pH value was needed. It was agreed that a special working group should be set up to pursue this idea but, in the meantime, it was also felt that the Russian proposal should be allowed; as a result, TU42 is added in column (13) of Table A in 3.2 against UN 3266 corrosive liquid, basic, inorganic, nos for both PG II and III.
Belgium asked for an extension of the transitional measures for the carriage of substances to which TU42 applies. It felt that the cut-off date of 2022 now appears to be too soon for industry and proposed 2033 instead. Others felt this was too long and a compromise was reached, settling on 31 December 2026 as the new cut-off.
An official submission from Belgium proposed to extend the requirement for entering the actual holding time in the transport document to portable tanks as it is already applicable to tank containers and tank-wagons carrying refrigerated liquefied gases. While there was broad support for the idea, it was felt that this should be passed up the chain to the UN Sub-committee of Experts on the Transport of Dangerous Goods (TDG).
The UK had continued to lead work through an informal group on the inspection and certification of tanks; this work followed the discovery that a significant number of road tankers imported into the UK had been approved by a body not authorised to do so. However, the ongoing work raised a number of concerns, not least from representatives of the rail industry, which felt that the system under RID works well as it stands. There were other problems relating to the legal position of the various parties in the supply chain under EU law.
It did not prove possible to discuss all the points raised in the UK’s paper, and the informal working group was planning to reconvene in December 2017 so further submissions under this topic are inevitable. However, the group did agree to amend the first two sentences of the first paragraph of 188.8.131.52.23 to read:
The ability of the manufacturer, or the maintenance or repair shop, to perform welding operations shall be verified and confirmed by either the competent authority or by the body designated by this authority. A weld quality assurance system shall be operated by the manufacturer or the maintenance or repair shop.
At the spring 2017 meeting there had been discussion of the position under the regulations of tanks that are designed with a concave section in the barrel. It was accepted that the current text leaves room for interpretation and that some modification was needed. Since then an informal working group had met to discuss the issue, although its conclusions were not well received, and the Netherlands arrived with an alternative proposal. This garnered more support but it will require standard EN 13094 to be amended. For the time being, the proposal has been adopted in square brackets. It consists of additional sentences at the end of footnote 2 to 184.108.40.206.18:
However the cross section of shells according to 220.127.116.11.14 a) may contain recesses or protrusions such as sumps, cut-outs or recessed manhole constructions. They may be constructed of flat or shaped (concave or convex) sheet metal. Dents and other unintended deformations shall not be regarded as recesses or protrusions
In an informal document the UK proposed including within the regulations a model tank plate, rather than leaving this to a standard. The idea was well received, on the condition that it should apply only to new tanks. Various other specifications were agreed. The UK was invited to submit a revised proposal at a future session.
Germany suggested that the use of austenitic-ferritic (Duplex) stainless steels should be recognised in 18.104.22.168.2(a). The working group was happy with the idea and added a new indent to the sub-paragraph. However, the specification that such steels may be used for cargoes at a temperature of -40˚C remains in square brackets as it needs to be checked: some delegates thought that refrigerated carbon dioxide is carried at a lower temperature. A reference to austenitic-ferritic stainless steel is also added at the end of the second indent to 22.214.171.124.1.
The Netherlands raised the question of standard EN 14596 on emergency pressure relief valves. It had been decided in 2005 not to reference the standard as it appeared to allow significant leakages in the event of a tank vehicle overturning. The standard has since been revised and the Working Group on Standards was now considering whether to insert a reference to it in ADR. The Netherlands was of the opinion that this should not happen, which was supported by other experts. The Working Group on Standards (see below) agreed.
The Netherlands also raised the question of the marking of tank codes on fibre-reinforced plastics (FRP) tanks. The experts recognised that some amendment of the current text was necessary and the Netherlands will return with a formal proposal.
The secretariat proposed the deletion of a number of transitional measures that have now expired. Most of those were agreed, although 126.96.36.199 and 188.8.131.52 were retained so as to provide clarity on why the tank record of tanks constructed before 1 January 2007 may not be complete.
France queried the marking of tanks with the date of initial inspection. The group’s consensus was that the date of the first hydraulic pressure test sets the start of the life of a tank and determines which version of the regulations apply to it. However, the date of the initial leakproofness test, which could be some time later, is preferable in determining the date of periodic and intermediate inspections. This topic will be considered in conjunction with work on the tank plate.
Referring to intermediate inspections on LPG road tankers, the UK was keen to build a body of evidence on the checking of safety valves and the option to use EN 14334 as an alternative. The UK is hoping that inspection bodies and industry will undertake a test programme, the results of which will be shared. In the meantime, the issue would be brought to the attention of the Working Group on Standards.
France asked if any experts had experienced problems with the electronic documents and electronic signatures in relation to inspections. The general feeling is that there is no problem with their use but, as it applies to other types of document, the issue should be brought to the attention of the plenary session. The Joint Meeting felt there is a potential problem, as not all electronic signatures have the same level of security. The assurance level must be sufficient to fulfil the requirements of ISO 17020.
The Working Group on Standards met during lunch breaks to discuss reports from the European Committee for Standardisation (CEN) on progress with relevant standards.
As a general rule, when a new version of a standard is introduced, a two-year transitional period is allowed. The Working Group agreed that it would be worth having a similar system for new standards. In effect, that would mean that newly referenced standards would become mandatory with the next edition of the regulations; for instance, those appearing for the first time in the 2019 edition will become mandatory on 1 January 2021. A formal proposal to amend standards already adopted for the 2019 will be made at the spring 2018 Joint Meeting.
The Working Group noted that there is a difference in the approach to periodic inspection of safety valves in EN 12972:2007 and EN 14334:2014, particularly in respect of what constitutes a “check of the satisfactory operation” of the valves. The Group could not state that either approach is incorrect but felt that the work proposed by the UK (see above) might provide useful evidence for further discussion.
The Working Group supported CEN’s proposal to limit the scope of EN 12245, following Denmark’s report on accidents involving LPG cylinders constructed in accordance with EN 12245:2002. Given that LPG cylinders are adequately covered by EN 14427:2014, it was felt that the versions of EN 12245 referenced in RID/ADR should be accompanied by a Note forbidding their application to LPG cylinders. A decision on this will be made at the next session.
A number of updated standards were adopted for Chapter 6 of ADR/RID.
EN ISO 17871:2015 + A1  on the specification and type testing of quick-release valves for gas cylinders, with the existing reference to EN ISO 17871:2015 no longer applicable after 31 December 2020;
EN 13807:2017 on the design, manufacture, identification and testing of battery vehicles and multiple-element gas containers, with the existing reference to EN 13807:2003 no longer applicable after 31 December 2020;
EN 13317  on manhole cover assemblies for tanks for the transport of dangerous goods, with the existing reference to EN 13317:2002 + A1:2006 no longer applicable after 31 December 2020;
EN 1440:2016 + A1: (except Annex C) on the periodic inspection of traditional welded and brazed steel LPG cylinders, with the existing reference to EN 1440:2016 (except Annex C) no longer applicable after 31 December 2020 and references to earlier versions of EN 1440, EN 14912 and EN ISO 11623 deleted;
EN 16728:2016 + A1: (except clause 3.5, Annex F and Annex G, on the periodic inspection of transportable refillable LPG cylinders other than those of traditional welded and brazed steel, with the existing reference to EN 16728:2016 no longer applicable after 31 December 2020.
The secretariat provided the Joint Meeting with an exhaustive report on the results of the April 2017 meeting of the Ad Hoc Working Group on the Harmonisation of RID/ADR/ADN with the UN Recommendations on the Transport of Dangerous Goods, which included a 53-page document containing proposed amendments taken from the 20th revised edition of the UN Recommendations.
The Joint Meeting considered each of these proposals in turn and adopted the changes, subject to some editorial modifications. The most significant of these include:
(a) rationalisation of the use of the terms ‘risk’ and ‘hazard’ throughout the regulations
(b) addition of a new sub-section 184.108.40.206 on samples of energetic materials for testing purposes
(c) insertion of a new section 2.1.5 on the classification of articles as ‘articles containing dangerous goods, nos’, with the renumbering of the existing 2.1.5 as 2.1.6
(d) amendments to 220.127.116.11.7 relating to flash composition and the appropriate testing methods
(e) changes in 2.2.51 relating to the classification of ammonium nitrate fertilisers
(f) replacement of the existing text of section 2.2.8 on Class 8 corrosive substances with a completely new text (some of which is different to that in the UN Recommendations)
(g) the following new entries are added to the Dangerous Goods List:
UN 3535 toxic solid, flammable, inorganic, nos
UN 3536 lithium batteries installed in cargo transport unit
UN 3537 articles containing flammable gas, nos
UN 3538 articles containing non-flammable, non-toxic gas, nos
UN 3539 articles containing toxic gas, nos
UN 3540 articles containing flammable liquid, nos
UN 3541 articles containing flammable solid, nos
UN 3542 articles containing a substance liable to spontaneous combustion, nos
UN 3543 articles containing a substance which emits flammable gas in contact with water, nos
UN 3544 articles containing oxidising substance, nos
UN 3545 articles containing organic peroxide, nos
UN 3546 articles containing toxic substance, nos
UN 3547 articles containing corrosive substance, nos
UN 3548 articles containing miscellaneous dangerous goods, nos
(h) substantive changes in special provisions 188, 251, 307 and 376
(i) new special provisions 193 (ammonium nitrate fertilisers), 301 (machinery or apparatus containing dangerous goods), 387 (lithium batteries), 388 (vehicles powered by flammable liquid or gas or fuel cells), 389 (lithium batteries installed in a cargo transport unit), 392 (fuel gas containment systems), 671 (chemical kits and first aid kits), 672 (machinery and apparatus) and 673 (RID only, applicable to the new entries for articles containing dangerous goods)
(j) new special packing provisions PP94 and PP95 added in packing instruction P520, relating to energetic samples
(k) new packing instructions P006 (for UN 3537 to 3548), P907 (for UN 3363) and P911 (for damaged or defective cells or batteries)
(l) substantive changes in packing instructions IBC520, LP902, LP903 and LP904
(m) new packing instructions LP03 (for UN 3537 to 3548), LP905 (for pre-production prototypes and small production runs of lithium cells and batteries) and LP906 (for damaged or defective cells or batteries)
(n) addition of provision for large salvage packagings
(o) a new sub-section 18.104.22.168.1.12 with special provisions for the labelling of articles containing dangerous goods
(p) amendments to the specimen labels in 22.214.171.124.2
(q) addition of provisions for bulk containers, especially in Chapter 5.3
(r) several additions and revisions to the standards referenced in Chapter 6.2
(s) amendments to the IBC testing provisions in Chapter 6.5, and
(t) a new 7.1.7 on special provisions for the carriage of self-reactive substances stabilised by temperature control.
In the process of agreeing these amendments, a number of questions emerged. Russia queried the meaning of ‘energetic substances’ and whether a definition should be added in 1.2.1. That question will be taken to the UN TDG Sub-committee.
With the terms ‘risk’ and ‘hazard’ having been rationalised, it was noticed that, in 126.96.36.199.1(b), the terminology used to describe packing groups in the English text uses the word ‘hazard’, whereas the more usual terminology for packing groups uses ‘danger’. The same problem does not exist in the French text, which is the reference version for ADR, but it seemed worth bringing this to the attention of the UN TDG Sub-committee.
Now that all provisions concerning the classification of ammonium nitrate fertilisers have been consolidated section 39 in the Manual of Tests and Criteria, some details in special provision 307 have now been deleted. This has presented a problem for such material not accepted for carriage, as mentioned in the 13th indent of 188.8.131.52.2. Sweden offered some amended text but this did not achieve a consensus. It is likely that this will be another issue to go back to the UN TDG Sub-committee.
In plenary, there was extensive discussion of the new provisions for ammonium nitrate fertilisers. It was noted that the current provisions in RID/ADR/ADN are more restrictive than those in the UN Recommendations and the conditions imposed for maritime and air carriage. On the basis of a presentation by Fertilizers Europe, it was decided that this is not a problem.
The text of the new special provision 389 in the UN Recommendations was also deemed to be unclear, as it could be interpreted as applying to a container carrying batteries, whereas it is meant to apply to containers fitted with batteries, which are being used as mobile power sources in remote locations. The Joint Meeting amended the UN text and will inform the UN TDG Sub-committee.
The new special provision 392 has effectively replaced the existing special provision 660 in RID/ADR/ADN. The Working Group felt it appropriate, therefore, that 392 be assigned to all those UN numbers to which 660 is currently assigned. This includes UN 1972, to which 660 is not assigned in the UN Recommendations. The Working Group also noted that ECE regulation No 110 has been amended to cover LNG-fuelled vehicles, meaning the table in SP 392(a) should be amended. These issues will be brought to the attention of the UN TDG Sub-committee.
Germany proposed extending the scope of SP 392 to cover non-flammable and non-toxic gases (groups A and O), recognising the needs of the automobile industry. Many felt that this was an issue that should be taken to the UN TDG Sub-committee in the first instance but the German representative stressed that it was a matter of urgency for industry. It was eventually agreed to insert new text but only for group A gases; this was done by amending special provision 660 to read:
For the carriage of fuel gas containment systems designed and approved to be fitted in motor vehicles containing this gas the provisions of sub-section 184.108.40.206 and Chapter 6.2 [ADN: of ADR] need not be applied when carried for disposal, recycling, repair, inspection, maintenance or from where they are manufactured to a vehicle assembly plant, provided the conditions described in special provision 392 are met. This also applies for mixtures of gases subject to special provision 392 and gases of group A subject to this special provision.
The Working Group also foresaw issues with practical implementation of the new provisions for the transport of articles containing dangerous goods. In particular, the position of UN 3363 is difficult, since dangerous goods in machinery or apparatus are not currently subject to RID/ADR/ADN by dint of 220.127.116.11(b). In plenary, the Joint Meeting decided to delete 18.104.22.168(b) and to assign special provision 301 to UN 3363, deleting the last sentence concerning exemptions that can be made by the competent authority. Conditions for such exemptions will now be consolidated in SP 672. A four-year transition has been allowed for 22.214.171.124(b).
The Working Group will also seek clarification about the placarding of cargo transport units (CTUs) containing lithium batteries. RID/ADR/ADN (and the IMDG Code) currently require CTUs with lithium batteries of UN 3090, 3091, 3480 or 3481 to bear the placard corresponding to label model No 9, not No 9A, although the text in the UN Recommendations is not clear. Similarly, SP 389 indicates that CTUs shipped under the new UN 3536 entry should carry a No 9 placard.
There was also discussion about the labelling and placarding of articles that contain both dangerous goods and lithium batteries; 126.96.36.199(b) allows the hazard presented by the batteries to be not communicated but this hazard is not represented by other labels. It was felt that the UN Recommendations are not clear on how to deal with this. A proposal from Germany and Sweden was deemed acceptable, resulting in the amendment of 188.8.131.52.12.1 to read:
Packages containing articles or articles carried unpackaged shall bear labels according to 184.108.40.206 reflecting the hazards established according to 2.1.5, except that for articles that in addition contain lithium batteries, a lithium battery mark or a label conforming to model No. 9A is not required.
The Working Group noted that the new provisions in Chapter 7.1 on temperature control during transport reflect to a large extent the provisions already found in special provisions V8 and S4 of ADR. Some work may be needed to streamline the provisions, but this will be left to WP15 since it only affects ADR.
The second part of this two-part report on the autumn 2017 Joint Meeting in next month’s HCB Monthly will cover ongoing and new proposals for amending RID/ADR/ADN, questions of interpretation and reports from informal working groups.
[post_title] => Joint Meeting: Go your own way
[post_status] => publish
[comment_status] => open
[ping_status] => open
[post_name] => joint-meeting-go-way
[post_modified] => 2018-01-12 10:48:33
[post_modified_gmt] => 2018-01-12 10:48:33
[post_parent] => 0
[guid] => https://www.hcblive.com/?p=8990
[menu_order] => 0
[post_type] => post
[comment_count] => 0
[filter] => raw
Joint Meeting: Go your own way
Regulatory harmonisation still proves elusive, as the autumn 2017 Joint Meeting exemplified. RID, ADR and ADN will still vary from the UN model regulations