[ID] => 10986
[post_author] => 34
[post_date] => 2019-05-07 09:25:04
[post_date_gmt] => 2019-05-07 08:25:04
[post_content] => The Joint Meeting of the RID Committee of Experts and the UN Economic Commission for Europe’s (ECE) Working Party on the Transport of Dangerous Goods (WP15) was held in Bern from 18 to 22 March. It was chaired by Claude Pfauvadel (France) with Silvia Garcia Wolfrum (Spain) as vice-chair. The meeting was attended by representatives of 21 states, the European Commission, the EU Agency for Railways (ERA), the Organisation for Cooperation between Railways (OSJD) and 11 non-governmental organisations.
The Joint Meeting acts as a common forum for the bodies responsible for managing the modal regulations on the transport of dangerous goods in effect across Europe and, especially for road transport, elsewhere in the world. In this way, regulatory amendments can be harmonised as far as possible between RID (rail), ADR (road) and ADN (inland waterways).
The spring 2019 session was the first to take place after the UN Experts had adopted the text of the 21st revised edition of the Model Regulations, although much of the experts’ work involved reviewing issues relating to the changes made in the 2019 texts of RID, ADR and ADN.
As is the usual practice, those documents submitted to the Joint Meeting on the topic of transport in tanks were entrusted to the Working Group on Tanks, which met concurrently for the first three days of the session under the chairmanship of Arne Bale (UK), with Kees de Putter (Netherlands) acting as secretary.
Belarus brought a proposal, following discussions at an earlier session of WP15, to rationalise the use of the terms ‘test’ and ‘inspection’ in 188.8.131.52.1. This was supplemented by an informal document from the UK and led to the agreement to replace ‘test’ or ‘tests’ by ‘inspection’ or ‘inspections’ in the ninth and tenth indents of 184.108.40.206.1, in the seventh and eighth indents of 220.127.116.11.10, in the last indent of 18.104.22.168.11 (for RID only), in 6.10.4, and in special tank provisions TT6 and TT8. Specific reference to the hydraulic pressure test in TT6 is deleted. The London working group, due to meet in June, will consider other consequential amendments and return with further proposals at the autumn session of the Joint Meeting.
Belgium asked for the assignment of a portable tank instruction to UN 3160 trifluorochloroethylene. At present this can be carried in portable tanks under an interim approval according to 22.214.171.124 of the International Maritime Dangerous Goods (IMDG) Code but Belgium has been asked by a consignor to issue a similar approval for inland carriage. It was decided that this was a matter for the UN Sub-committee of Experts on the Transport of Dangerous Goods to consider.
The International Tank Container Organisation (ITCO) returned with a further attempt to clarify the definition of ‘Tank-container/portable tank operator’ in 1.2.1. This currently indicates that the operator is the tank owner, while in practice a large proportion of the tank container fleet is leased by operators. It had emerged that any change to this definition could cause problems in RID, where the definition covers ‘Operator of a tank-container, portable tank or tank-wagon’. Further work will be needed to resolve the issue.
Romania returned with further attempts to clarify the meaning of the terms ‘risk’ and ‘hazard/danger’ and align the English and French versions. Its latest paper related to Chapters 4.3, 6.8 and 6.10. A number of comments were made, which will be taken into consideration in the drafting of a revised paper for the next session.
The UK followed up on discussions at the previous session with a proposal to clarify the protection required for the fittings and accessories mounted on the upper part of vacuum-operated waste tanks. A number of differing opinions were expressed, with some experts feeling that there is no need to change the existing text. It was not possible to reach a conclusion but it was agreed that the text should be clarified in order to ensure a common interpretation. The UK was invited to submit a revised document at a future session.
The UK presented a report on the ninth session of the informal working group on the inspection and certification of tanks. While progress had been made in a number of areas – it has, for instance, been agreed that competent authorities will publish a list of approved inspection bodies and the scope of activities for which they have been approved, and additional criteria have been agreed to align the general rules on the obligations of inspection bodies with those required by EN ISO/IEC 17020:2012 – there are still a number of concerns and reservations. The Joint Meeting was asked to give its consent to a suggested programme of work, which was provided.
Poland sought to tidy up an issue that had emerged when 126.96.36.199.7 was amended in 2016, allowing tanks, battery-wagons/battery-vehicles and multiple-element gas containers (MEGCs) to be used for up to a month after the due date of the next periodic inspection, if they had been filled before that date. No similar allowance had been made for intermediate inspections, albeit 188.8.131.52.3 provides for the intermediate inspection to take place within three months before or after the due date. After some discussion, the experts agreed some changes to 184.108.40.206.7 but placed them in square brackets pending further work.
In an informal document, the UK presented the preliminary findings of a test programme for pressure relief valves for LPG road tankers. The purpose of the programme is to build up evidence that will allow inspection bodies to check documentation or the marking of set pressures at intermediate inspections rather than having to test such valves. So far, 145 valves have been tested with only one showing deviation from its opening pressure. The Working Group thanked the UK for its information and noted that EN 14334 allows visual inspection of the pressure relief valve.
The Netherlands had been looking at the distinction between portable tanks and tank containers and suggested in an informal document that dual approval would be useful to industry, while acknowledging it could be confusing for inspection bodies. The tenor of the meeting was strongly against the use of dual approvals but there was some support for the reorganisation of tank instructions to align the provisions for portable tanks and tank containers. The Netherlands will work together with Belgium on the topic.
The International Union of Private Wagons (UIP) noted that EN 14025 no longer refers to standard flanges for manholes for tank wagons, which had had the effect of reducing the minimum diameter of manholes from the specified 500 mm to 492 mm. UIP asked whether standard flanges with an internal diameter of 492 mm may still be used. The Working Group considered that the 500 mm minimum diameter must be observed; a transitional provision may be needed to allow tank-wagons built according to EN 14025:2008 to continue to be used.
Germany asked whether heating elements are allowed on tanks manufactured from fibre-reinforce plastics (FRP). Wording in 220.127.116.11 of the English and French texts states that “heating elements shall not be used for FRP tanks”, but this refers to design and construction rather than operation. Most of the experts felt that this means also that such tank should not be equipped with heating elements, although in plenary the representative of the Netherlands stated that his country interprets this differently. The Joint Meeting invited delegations to consider whether clarification is needed.
The Working Group on Standards had an easier ride at the spring Joint Meeting, coming together during lunch breaks to consider a handful of papers.
The European Committee for Standardisation (CEN) provided an update on progress. The European Commission has handed over the responsibility for appointing a consultant to EY, although no appointment has yet been made. The harmonised standards (HAS) consultant will advise the Joint Meeting on work in progress at CEN that will result in the development or revision of standards relevant to RID/ADR/ADN. A number of non-governmental organisations, meanwhile, are considering hiring an independent advisor on standards to replace the former CEN consultant.
CEN summarised some standards in development, on which states have already commented. These largely deal with gas cylinders and their equipment.
It was also noted that the mandate given in 1995 by the European Commission to CEN and CENELEC for the development of standards in the field of the transport of dangerous goods is to be revoked.
Finland opened a discussion on the need or otherwise for the regulations to refer to the latest version of each standard. It might be possible to obviate the need to change references at each update by replacing them with dynamic references, referring to the latest version applicable rather than to a specific year, so long as it is made clear that earlier version may still be used until their expiry date. Finland will work up an official proposal for the next session on the basis of comments made.
The Secretariat noted that at the last session of the Joint Meeting, it had been decided to update the references in 18.104.22.168.1 and 22.214.171.124.2 to EN 12972 to the 2018 edition; application of the 2007 edition will be limited to 30 June 2021. Since then, the Secretariat had spotted that EN 12972 is also referenced in 126.96.36.199 and that this needed to be updated as well. The Joint Meeting agreed the change.
INTERPRETATION OF RID/ADR/ADN
Germany raised some concerns about the interpretation of 188.8.131.52.1 in RID/ADR, which deals with the delegation of inspection tasks. Its paper said that it is being interpreted to mean that an accreditation covers not only the accredited inspection body but also any external sub-contractors. It is sometimes also assumed that the same paragraph authorises the accredited inspection body to assess the competent of sub-contractors through audits in accordance with EN ISO/IEC 17020 or EN ISO/IEC 17025, and that separate accreditation of this sub-contractor can then be dispensed with, because “equivalence” has been demonstrated. This is also obviously incorrect, Germany contended.
The Joint Meeting agreed with an interpretation provided by France, to the effect that any sub-contractor that is not itself accredited may be covered by the accreditation of the inspection body but that the assessment of that sub-contractor is subject to procedures validated in the context of its accreditation by the accreditation body. An ongoing monitoring process as part of the accreditation procedure allows sub-contractors to be included in the inspection body accreditation. The paper from France provided references to support this argument in EN ISO/IEC 17020.
The representative of Germany took note of the interpretation provided by the Joint Meeting and said she would check how this issue is being addressed at national level in her country and, on the basis of the outcome, may consider the need to request additional clarifications.
PROPOSALS FOR AMENDMENT
Butadienes Spain returned with a revised proposal to harmonise the name and description of UN 1010 in RID/ADR with that in the UN Model Regulations. UN 1010 covers butadienes and butadiene/hydrocarbon mixtures, stabilised; in the Model Regulations this applies only to products containing more than 40 per cent butadienes but the RID/ADR proper shipping name includes references to vapour pressure and density, which allows the entry to be used with some products that have less than 40 per cent butadienes.
The paper from Spain included an analysis of possible alternative entries, particularly UN 1965 and 3161, and their applicable special provisions. It offered two ways to deal with the disharmony, of which the Joint Meeting preferred the simpler alternative of simply adopting the name and description as used in the Model Regulations.
Online training The International Road Transport Union (IRU) followed up on earlier discussions at the Joint Meeting and WP15 on the possibility of allowing online training for driver refresher courses, at least for part of the specified curriculum. There was broad support in principle for the idea but the Joint Meeting found the IRU proposal too open. IRU was invited to review its proposal in light of the comments made, and also to consider whether a similar approach could be used in the training of ADN experts. Interested delegations were invited to submit comments in writing to IRU.
Polymerising waste Germany returned to the problem of the stabilisation of polymerising substances shipped as waste material. Safe transport of polymerising substances relies on the stabilisation of the material, either by temperature control or the use of a chemical inhibitor. This requires the shipper to establish the self-accelerating polymerisation temperature (SAPT) and determine the appropriate control and emergency temperatures. In the case of wastes, such information is often not available, and the exact composition of the waste stream may vary from day to day; thus it is impossible to comply with the control provisions in 184.108.40.206 and 220.127.116.11.
Germany offered some ideas as to how the hazards inherent in the transport of polymerising wastes might be managed. The Joint Meeting agreed to entrust the consideration of the issues raised to the Working Group on Wastes led by the European Federation of Waste Management and Environmental Services (FEAD), which was to meet in early April.
Carriage of gases Switzerland followed up on earlier discussions at WP15 with a proposal to amend CW36/CV36 to include safety measures similar to those provided for substances that present a risk of asphyxiation. The Joint Meeting agreed and adopted an amended second sentence to those additional provisions. That for CW36 in RID will read:
If this is not feasible and packages are carried in other closed wagons or containers, gas exchange between the load compartment and accessible compartments during carriage shall be prevented and the cargo doors of the wagons or containers shall be marked with the following in letters not less than 25 mm high:
OPEN WITH CAUTION”
Similar text is included in CV36 for ADR, referring to the driver’s cab and to vehicles rather than wagons.
Another paper from Switzerland sought an amendment to special provision 653 to include requirements for the filling of cylinders with those asphyxiant gases mentioned. Again the Joint Meeting found this acceptable and, in the first indent of SP 653, replaced “for construction and testing” with “for construction, testing and filling”.
IBCs and large packagings Spain reported that industry was confused about the meaning of the last sentence of 18.104.22.168, “The packagings for which the test is not required are mentioned under 22.214.171.124”. The confusion arises because 126.96.36.199 mentions the design type test, while 188.8.131.52 refers to the leakproofness test. Spain believed that the sentence in question may have been carried over from some other requirement, as it does not appear in the UN Model Regulations or the IMDG Code.
The Joint Meeting agreed with Spain’s argument and decided to delete the last sentence of 184.108.40.206.
Chemical and first aid kits The UK noted that the new special provision 671 included in the 2019 edition of RID and ADR, attached to UN 3316 chemical and first aid kits, does not make it possible to assign a transport category to those kits that contain only dangerous goods to which no packing group is assigned. This seemed to be an oversight. The UK proposed new text to clarify that such kits should be assigned to transport category 2.
The Joint Meeting agreed and added a new paragraph at the end of SP 671. That for ADR reads:
Kits containing only dangerous goods to which no packing group is assigned shall be allocated to transport category 2 for completion of transport documents and the exemption related to quantities carried per transport unit (see 220.127.116.11).
Similar text for RID refers to “quantities carried per wagon or large container”. The experts also noted that the amendment is also relevant to ADN.
Hazard/risk A further paper from Romania aiming to rationalise the use of the words ‘hazard’ and ‘risk’ led to an exchange of views. The Joint Meeting agreed that these terms should only be used when strictly necessary and in a consistent manner. Due attention must also be given to consistency of terminology with the Model Regulations, the Manual of Tests and Criteria, and the GHS. The working group looking at the issue was invited to come up with a revised proposal in light of the comments made.
Assignment of responsibilities The new 7.1.7, introduced in ADR and ADN this year, brings together various obligations regarding the technical maintenance of cargo transport units carrying Division 4.1 or 5.2 substances stabilised by temperature control, as well as possible emergency procedures. Germany thought it would be valuable to include a table to assign those obligations to the various participants in the supply chain and had already raised the topic with the ADN Safety Committee.
There was some support for the idea in principle, with some discussion on how specific the provisions should be. The representative of Germany promised to work jointly with industry and other stakeholders and return with a formal proposal that would cover all possible scenarios.
Packing certificate The Netherlands invited the experts’ opinion on the role of the container/vehicle packing certificate, as delineated in 5.4.2 of RID/ADR/ADN. Its paper noted that such a certificate is only required if dangerous goods are being carried under those regulations prior to a sea voyage. If there is no sea voyage involved, then no packing certificate needs to be provided, which suggests that it cannot be seen as a measure that improves safety in the carriage of dangerous goods by inland modes. Therefore, why is the provision in RID, ADR and ADN?
The Joint Meeting found it hard to disagree, especially as electronic communication should make it a simple task for the shipper to provide the carrier with the necessary certificate. The Netherlands will work up an official proposal to delete the requirement for the next session.
SP 389 The Secretariat of the Intergovernmental Organisation for International Carriage by Rail (OTIF) said it had received several enquiries about the interpretation of special provision 389, both for rail and road transport. SP 389, applicable to UN 3536 lithium batteries installed in cargo transport units, was taken into RID/ADR/ADN from the 20th revised edition of the Model Regulations.
In the Model Regulations, the last sentence of SP 389 states: “The cargo transport unit shall display the UN number in accordance with 18.104.22.168.2 and be placarded on two opposing sides in accordance with 22.214.171.124.2.” In RID/ADR/ADN that is interpreted as requiring orange-coloured plates and placards. For RID, those orange-coloured plates have to include the hazard identification number (90) and the UN number; ADR does not indicate a hazard identification number for UN 3536 so for road transport the orange-coloured plates are left blank. There are also differences in the location of the orange-coloured plates. OTIF felt that this creates disharmony and confusion and it would be better if the requirements could be aligned.
After some discussion of the issue, it was felt that, as carriage of such articles often involves a maritime leg, the matter should be brought to the attention of the UN TDG Sub-committee. The OTIF Secretariat was invited to submit an official document to that body.
UN 3363 Switzerland felt that, following the adoption of the new entries (UN 3537 to 3548) for articles containing dangerous goods, some clarification was needed for the explanatory notes to help shippers assign their goods to the most appropriate entry. The Joint Meeting agreed that some clarification would be useful and made two changes, on the basis of an informal document drawn up by Germany and Switzerland.
The Note under the heading of 2.1.5 is amended to read:
Articles which do not have a proper shipping name and which contain only dangerous goods within the permitted limited quantity amounts specified in Column (7a) of Table A of Chapter 3.2, UN No. 3363 and special provisions 301 and 672 of Chapter 3.3 may be applied.
As a consequence, the Note to special provision 301 is deleted.
SP 667 Another paper from Switzerland highlighted what it saw as inconsistencies in the text of special provision 667, particularly sub-paragraphs (b) and (c). SP 667 has been assigned to UN 3537 to 3548 as well as the lithium battery entries, meaning that the text of SP 667(b) and (c) now also refers to articles, which was not the original purpose of the text. The paper from Switzerland offered a way to clarify matters, which after some revision was deemed acceptable. As a result, reference to ‘article’ or ‘articles’ in (a), (b)(i), (b)(ii) and (c) is deleted.
The Joint Meeting heard reports from the informal working groups on the reduction on the risk of a BLEVE during transport of dangerous goods and on telematics. Both groups are continuing with their work.
The European Industrial Gases Association (EIGA) reported on an informal meeting held to discuss the carriage of pressure receptacles approved by the US Department of Transportation (DOT). The meeting discussed possible text for RID/ADR/ADN that would allow the import and export of such cylinders. EIGA continues to work with DOT and the Compressed Gas Association (CGA) to develop a petition for rulemaking to amend the US Hazardous Materials Regulations so as to permit similar carriage of European cylinders into and from the US. EIGA is also working with the UK to draft a new multilateral agreement under ADR to replace M299, which was due to expire on 1 June 2019.
The Joint Meeting head that the first meeting of the informal working group on the improvement of the accident report was due to take place in The Hague on 19 and 20 June. ERA indicated that the guides to facilitate the use of the harmonised technical framework for the Transport of Dangerous Goods for inland transport developed by the agency and the European Commission are available on the ERA’s website. These include a framework guide, a guide on risk-estimation, a guide for decision making and a glossary.
The Joint Meeting’s autumn session is scheduled to take place from 17 to 27 September in Geneva. Prior to that, WP15 held its 106th session in mid-May; a report on that meeting will appear the August issue of HCB. The RID Committee of Experts’ standing working group is not scheduled to meet until late November, where it will discuss the outcome of both Joint Meeting sessions in 2019.
[post_title] => RID/ADR/ADN: Europe and beyond
[post_status] => publish
[comment_status] => open
[ping_status] => open
[post_name] => ridadradn-europe-beyond
[post_modified] => 2019-05-06 12:30:36
[post_modified_gmt] => 2019-05-06 11:30:36
[post_parent] => 0
[guid] => https://www.hcblive.com/?p=10986
[menu_order] => 0
[post_type] => post
[comment_count] => 0
[filter] => raw
RID/ADR/ADN: Europe and beyond
Before getting on to the latest amendments from the UN, the RID/ADR/ADN experts had to deal with issues arising from the last round of changes