Hazmat Certification Under Placarding Exemption
The US DOT recently issued a “Letter of Interpretation” (LoI) regarding the lack of a need for a driver to have a hazmat (hazardous materials) endorsement on the CDL (Commercial Driver’s License) when transporting Class 9 hazmat within the US, despite the presence of Class 9 placards.
Changing Modes without Removing Placards
This situation is likely to occur when foreign shipments arrive which did not have the equivalent to the US 49 CFR §172.504(f)(9) conditional exception for Class 9 placarding, and are to be transported to their US destination.
An example would be if a Class 9 consignment arrives by vessel, which has placarding in conformance with the IMDG Code, and is picked up for road transport without removing the placards.
Even if the placards are not removed, there is not a requirement for the hazmat-endorsed CDL (equivalent to a TDG training certificate- for readers North of the 49th, metonymically speaking).
Note that, despite the exception for an actual Class 9 placard, §172.504(f)(9) does require bulk packages to be marked with at least the UN number.
Key to the Endorsement Exemption
49 CFR §383.93(b)(4) invokes the need for a hazmat CDL when the definition of hazmat in 383.5 is met. For substances defined as hazardous in 49 U.S. Code §5103(a) and (other than infectious substances/ biotoxins in 42 CFR §73) requiring placards, the CDL endorsement is required.
Thus, for most Continue Reading…
Regular Damaged or Defective or Dangerous Damaged or Defective?
There is a fair amount of interest in the topic of preparing Damaged or Defective (DoD) lithium batteries for transport and how to make a determination of the degree of hazard they present.
The current (20th) 2017 Edition of the Recommendations on the Transport of Dangerous Goods (UN Model) Regulations have addressed the former (packaging for transport) aspect, but the documents currently posted have not yet established firm protocols for the latter.
The situations involving recalls of defective, unsafe batteries and incidents during transportation has sustained the efforts to find better ways of dealing with them. The topic has been under discussion at the United Nations Sub-Committee of Experts on the Transportation of Dangerous Goods (TDG) in most sessions over the last several years.
For this discussion we’ll refer to cells/batteries that do not meet the UN Manual of Test criteria due to damage or defect, without specific safety hazards, as “regular” DoD; and those that “are liable to disassemble rapidly, react dangerously, produce a flame or a dangerous evolution of heat, or produce a dangerous emission of toxic, corrosive or flammable gases or vapours” as “dangerous” DoD.
This distinction is proposed for clarification in the next version (21st Edition) of the UN Model. See, for example, working document ST/SG/AC.10C.3/2018/51:
Batteries or Reactive Substances?
As a technicality, we should pause to consider the basic Continue Reading…
TDG Large Packaging
Still Time to Review the draft “Design, Manufacture and Use of Large Packaging for Transportation of Dangerous Goods in Classes 3, 4, 5, 6.1, 8 and 9”
Transport Canada provided notice last month of the availability of a draft Canadian General Standards Board (CGSB) standard for large packagings for specified classes of dangerous goods (DG). The contents of the draft are largely based on the UN “Recommendations on the Transport of Dangerous Goods Model Regulations” (UN TDG Model) 20th Edition.
The draft is open for comment by interested parties until June 8, 2018.
Similar, but Not Identical
Although the current draft is based on the 20th edition of the UN Model, there are some differences – for example: the Canadian TDG regulations (TDGR) have not yet updated Schedule 1 to the current UN numbers above UN3534; TDGR cite Class-specific standards for certain DG (Classes 1, 2, 6); and not all of the lithium battery packaging has been incorporated.
The CGSB-43.145 proposal does, however, contain a supplementary instruction for UN2794 and UN2795 permitting these batteries to be shipped unpackaged on shelving that is permanently fixed within a vehicle. This LP801 standard presumably replaces equivalency certificates providing the option to battery distributers and members of automotive industry associations.
The UN Model and CGSB 43.145 are similar in restricting the use of large packaging to the lesser hazardous Classes/Divisions, typically at the packing Continue Reading…
Rail TDG Standard TP 14877 Update
On March 15 Transport Canada released a notice on the intent to issue a new January 2018 edition of standard TP 14877 “Containers for Transport of Dangerous Goods by Rail” to replace the current 2013 (with Corrigendum) edition.
This is the penultimate culmination of the public process, in part arising out of the Lac Mégantic 2013 disaster, undertaken by a stakeholder Consultative Committee that began in February of 2016.
The main features of the proposed 2018 edition include:
- Improved usability by incorporating external technical requirements, such as those in Protective Direction 34, 37 and 38.
- Updated dangerous goods list to align with the 19th edition of the UN Model Regulations. Adjusted special provisions to reflect updated transportation requirements for Sulphuric Acid (UN1831) and Hydrogen Peroxide (UN2014 / UN2015).
- Updated technical requirements for Class 3, Flammable Liquids and the new tank car specification known as TC 117.
- Improved harmonization between tank car requirements in Canada and the US, including tank car approvals, tank car design requirements and a new mechanism to secure One Time Movement Approvals (OTMA) – Category 2.
- Updated material of construction requirements for tank cars, including the addition of stainless steel, normalized steel for dangerous goods classified as a toxic inhalation hazard (TIH) and improved thickness requirements for new tank car construction.
Comparing the 2013 and 2018 Standard TP 14877
A brief comparison of the TABLE OF CONTENTS Continue Reading…
REGISTRATION and FINES and FAQs, OH MY!
February and March contain some interesting items potentially impacting the Canadian TDG landscape…
Transport Canada, through a consultation notice published in late February, has solicited input from stakeholders on a plan to require those who handle/offer for transport, transport or import dangerous goods to register with Transport Canada.
The premise is that, “… public safety depends” on Transport Canada knowing who is transporting DG, including where, when, and how much. The main thrust of this proposal seems to be for targeting enforcement and consultation activities.
The proposal as currently presented does not appear to distinguish among the size, frequency, or nature of DG involved; and will require period re-registration with submission of data to the “Client Information Database” (CID).
There’s nothing in the posted information to indicate whether there will be a cost to “clients” for registration, in addition to the record-keeping burden they will bear.
(For those familiar with the 49 CFR §107 (Subpart G) requirement, intended to subsidize government response activities, this TDG version does not serve the same purpose.)
The only exemptions currently contemplated, extend to those falling under a TDGR Part 1 “special case” exemption. This contrasts with 49 CFR’s registration which has exemptions based on load sizes and hazard types.
The TC proposal and comment provisions are found at:
While not directly cited in the Transport Canada TDG Act or regulations, Continue Reading…
Updated TDG Packaging Standard – Small Containers for Classes 3, 4, 5, 6.1, 8, & 9
In addition to expanding the title to reflect the various types of containers contemplated in the Transportation of Dangerous Goods regulation (TDGR) §5.6, 5.12 (and cited within other referenced standards), this “final draft” reflects the penultimate result of a review that’s been active since the adoption of the current edition in 2015.
Anatomy of Development
The 2nd Edition of TP14850, published October 2010 was adopted into the Canadian TDGR in July 2014, replacing CGSB-43.150-1997 and becoming the mandatory standard for packaging the “common” classes of dangerous goods in Canada in January 2015.
The 16th Edition (2009) UN Model was the primary basis for the 2010 TP14850 standard, so it was time to move forward in the spirit of harmonization.
Transport Canada began the process of forming a consultative committee in mid-2015. A public notice regarding the consultation was published in early 2016 with provision for general public input. The committee, formed in April 2016, consists of about 3 dozen participants.
The committee includes a core group of 6–8 from Transport Canada with the remainder representing a variety of industry associations, individual manufacturers, users, provincial/US regulatory interests, and labour organizations.
The draft presently open for general comment was developed by consensus following discussions, including face-to-face meetings and a series of web/teleconference sessions, between April 2016 and June 2017. Continue Reading…
2017 (20th Edition) – Highlights Changes
Those who follow the IATA DGR will have an idea of many of the changes resulting from the UN Recommendations expected to result from the changes in the 20th Edition of the commonly titled “Orange Book”.
Those who work with other modal/government regulations may not be familiar with changes that will likely follow in those regulations as all or part of the amended Model become incorporated.
Changes in Terminology
As often happens, terminology changes were introduced to this edition to clarify or technically improve concepts covered by the regulations. Throughout the document the term “risk” has been replaced by “hazard” to reflect the intent of referring to a danger.
Similarly, most references to “devices” now refer to “articles” which is defined in 184.108.40.206 as including “machinery, apparatus or other devices”.
New UN Numbers
UN3535 to UN3548 have been added to the collection:
- UN3535 refers to “TOXIC SOLID, FLAMMABLE, INORGANIC, N.O.S.”
- UN3536 is a new “LITHIUM BATTERIES INSTALLED IN A CARGO TRANSPORT UNIT” applicable to either ion or metal-based batteries.
- UN3537 through UN3548 cover a sequence of listings for “ARTICLES CONTAINING…, N.O.S.” applicable to a variety of Class 2-5, 6.1, 8 and 9 dangerous goods.
The additional entries result in related changes to classification sections and special provisions.
As we’ve seen over the last few years regulation of lithium battery regulations continues to evolve.
The concept of “equipment” in the sense of lithium Continue Reading…
Let’s Have the FAQs!
Transport Canada published an FAQ (“Frequently Asked Question”) summary on January 17 to clarify and provide background on the Marine Amendment (SOR/2017-253).
Although much of the information in the FAQ, detailing the purpose of the Part 11 and other related changes, was covered in the Gazette II RIAS (CGII Regulatory Impact and Analysis Statement), there are a couple of points that may be of interest.
Schedule 1 – Column 8 Clarification
The FAQ clarifies that the Col. 8 restriction is based on the specific categorization of the number of passengers as dictated in s. 1.10, not on the definition of “passenger carrying vessel” itself in s. 1.4
The amended reference to restriction of DG on board passenger-carrying vessels resulted in a separation on the basis for applying the Schedule 1, Col. 8 restriction. Formerly there was a qualifier in the Part 1.4 definition of “passenger carrying ship”, that invoked the restriction, based on a number of passengers per ship and/or per meter of ship length.
The current Canada Shipping (CS) Act has a definition for “Passenger, but not “passenger carrying vessel””.
Similarly, the Cargo, Fumigation and Tackle Regulations (CFTR), in s. 142, defines “passenger vessel” in the terms currently found in s. 1.10 of the TDGR.
Presumably, without the clarification in the FAQ, shippers might conclude that 1 passenger (based on the s. 1.4 definition) would invoke the Col. 8 Continue Reading…
Transport Canada issues new Part 11 and makes other miscellaneous changes
The December 13, 2017 edition of the Canada Gazette II contains the expected rewrite of Part 11 “Marine” requirements of the Transportation of Dangerous Goods Regulations (TDGR). In addition, there are related changes in other parts, as well as some unrelated miscellaneous changes in other areas.
The most wide-reaching change, although perhaps of relatively minor significance to the general regulated community, is the replacement of the term “ship” with “vessel”. This, among other changes, is to update the TDGR to current Canada Shipping Act (CSA, and related regulations) terminology. Many aspects of Part 11 related to the CSA had not been updated since 2008.
Note: Interestingly, the referenced definition of “vessel” in the CSA includes all “means of propulsion”:
This differs from the TDGR definitions for road and rail vehicles which expressly exclude “muscle power” as a means of propulsion. (“Means of transport” in TDGR is a different story, but perhaps we’ll leave that one for another blog!)
Other definition changes include elimination of the reference to “short run ferry”, previously defined in TDGR Part 1.3 as operating between points “not more than 3 km apart”. TDGR 1.30 special case exemption now refers only to “Ferry,” but describes within the exemption that it’s applicable to operating between two points “not more than 5 km apart.
The definition of an “inland Continue Reading…
Recognizing Technological Evolution while Maintaining Safety & Security
Explosives Regulations (ER) – Ports & Wharves
The Explosives Safety & Security Branch (ESSB) of Natural Resources Canada, and Transport Canada, have issued a Gazette I (CG I) proposal to amend their respective Explosives Regulations (ER, under the Explosives Act), and the Cargo Fumigation and Tackle Regulations (CFTR, under the Canada Shipping Act).
The initial reason for the proposed amendment is to remove reference to the express requirement to use quantity/distance principle (QDP) restrictions and ESSB Inspectors from the CFTR. A more modern approach of quantitative risk assessments (QRA), based on actual probable hazards following, methodology authorized by the ESSB (Chief Inspector of Explosives), would replace the more rigid QDP.
QDP, currently covered in CAN/BNQ 2910-510/2015, were established mainly for fixed manufacturing/storage facilities and specifically exclude transportation activities from the scope of the standard.
The proposal also provides for having qualified individuals, not just ESSB Inspectors, determine the risk following an approved QRA methodology. The requirements will appear in a new ER section 203.1 instead of the current CFTR section 155(2) & (3).
It is expected that international trade and commerce will be improved without sacrificing safety or security under this proposal.
Explosives – Other Amendments
The CG I amendment proposes to also include ER changes under the topics of:
- Eliminating or relaxing license requirements for certain “low risk” explosives (7 components);
- Clarification of wording (13 components); and
- Increasing Continue Reading…