Much like Sheryl Crow sang, “A change, could do you good”, at least one would hope. When it comes to PHMSA, change is aimed at improving an already existing process, or adding a new process we can all benefit from. So in this case, I believe Sheryl Crow is right.
With that being said, The U.S. Department of Transportation’s Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), recently issued a final rule that requires railroads to create and submit Comprehensive Oil Spill Response Plans for route segments traveled by High Hazard Flammable Trains also called HHFTs. The rule applies to these trains that are transporting petroleum oil in a block of 20 or more loaded tank cars and trains that have a total of 35 loaded petroleum oil tank cars.
Why the Change?
Incidents involving crude oil can have devastating consequences to local communities and the environment. Countering these effects on the environment can take between a few weeks to many years, depending on the damage caused. For this reason, fast and effective response is essential to rail accidents containing oil. The 174-page final rule is designed to improve the response readiness and decrease the effects of rail accidents and incidents involving petroleum oil and a flammable train. The agency said the rule also is needed due to expansion in U.S. energy production having led to “significant challenges for the Continue Reading…
Dear Valued Customer,
In an effort to continuously improve the quality
and performance of our UN packaging, we occasionally must make changes to the
specifications and usage instructions. This notice is to inform you that the
following changes have been made to BX-24DU
- The clear tape required for closure of this packaging has changed from 2 strips of 3M #305 48mm wide clear tape to 1 strip of 3M #375 48mm wide clear tape. This change to a stronger tape caused the box to perform better in drop tests, resulting in a more secure packaging.
If you have any questions or concerns, please
contact our customer relations center in the US at 888-442-9628 or in Canada at
Michael S. Zendano
ICC Has Gained Weight – In a Good Way!
In a society where oftentimes less is more, diet trends have come in many forms. Whether it’s the ketogenic diet, South Beach, or Atkins, many of us are looking to drop a few pounds and go lighter. But in the dangerous goods packaging world, the higher the weight allowance, the better. A higher weight allowance on the UN certification marking means that you can ship more of your dangerous goods in the outer packaging.
An example of this is the UN marking from our BX-8SP variation box below. As you can see it carries a 5.4 KG weight rating, meaning that is the maximum gross weight limit allowed when shipping dangerous goods in this box.
New Gross Weights for ICC Packaging
Here at ICC Compliance Center we are in the process of increasing the weight limits on our boxes. As you can see in the chart below, we are already off to a great start.
|Weights accurate as of the date of publication and are subject to change
Stay tuned … there will be more to come in the coming year!
Going Above and Beyond
ICC Compliance Center’s line of UN approved boxes now meet ASTM D5118 Standard Practice for Fabrication of Fiberboard Shipping Boxes. ASTM D5118 boxes meet manufacturing requirements that are written for corrugated and solid fiberboard boxes by ASTM International, an international standards organization that develops and publishes voluntary technical standards for a wide range of products including packaging.
This standard ensures factors and components such as adhesive or fasteners at the manufactures joint of the corrugated box are controlled during the manufacturing process. The ASTM-D5118 Standard provides a first-rate practice for manufacturing criteria of commercial fiberboard styles and packaging ensuring a consistent manufacturing process across the board for our Hazmat boxes. For more information please visit ASTM International’s website below.
Training is needed in everything we do. Whether it is work, play or home we are constantly learning or being trained on something. We train our children for adulthood. We train our athletes how to run plays or moves. We are trained at our places of employment on how to do our jobs properly. Training in all aspects of life is in place to help us do things properly, help us succeed and help keep us safe.
In the workplace, how do we know just what type of training we should be getting? Obviously, it is going to change from site to site based on the type of business you work for. Regardless of the type of business, all workplaces are required by the OSH Act to provide a safe place to work. As per OSHA there are relevant types of training needed for different types of industry. These industries listed below with their appropriate regulation could be required:
If an industry doesn’t fall under a specific regulation like construction, they would follow the general industry standard. OSHA just updated their “Training Requirements in OSHA Standards” booklet. In this booklet OSHA gives a guide to all training requirements for employers, safety and health professionals, training directors and others to comply with Continue Reading…
As I get older and more wrinkles, crow’s feet and age spots appear on my face, I consider some sort of plastic surgery like a facelift. According to the dictionary, a facelift is a procedure carried out to improve the appearance of someone or something. A little nip and tuck, tightening and smoothing could go a long way in removing some of my signs of aging. So, how does my desire to look younger have anything to do with OSHA? To put it simply, OSHA’s website on Hazard Communication got a facelift.
Click to enlarge
OSHA announced the update to the Hazard Communication website in the November 2nd QuickTakes newsletter under the Educational Resources section. To see the full newsletter, click here.
The new look actually makes the site easier to maneuver through as there are now drop-down tabs that can be used for faster searching for needed information. A quick review of each tab is as follows:
- Safety Data Sheets: This tab includes the Safety Data Sheets QuikCard™ in both HTML and PDF formats along with the OSHA SDS Brief regarding Safety Data Sheets that incorporates Appendix D of the HazCom2012 regulation.
- Labeling: On this tab the setup is very similar to that of the Safety Data Sheets. An additional link is to a QuickCard™ of a comparison between NFPA and OSHA labels.
- Pictograms: Here again are the same features as the Continue Reading…
Updated injury and incident reports from OSHA
From Jan 1 to Dec 31, 2014 there were 5589 ladder incidents reported that have resulted in injury and even death according to OSHA. 14 incidents additionally reported for ladder hooks, 90 more for ladder jack scaffold and another 8840 incidents including death under fall protection. These numbers really just scratch the surface. There are many incidents that appear under other categories that involve ladders and falls. Fall incidents within the past month are presented in the table below. More information is available on OSHA’s website (http://www.osha.gov).
|Date of Incident
||Preliminary Description of Incident
||Fatality or Catastrophe
||Worker cleaning window killed in fall.
||Worker killed in fall through gap between jet and jet bridge.
||Worker on stilts hanging drywall killed in fall.
||Worker killed in fall from manlift.
||Worker welding on steel decking killed in fall.
||Worker killed in fall on portable stairs.
||Worker on snow-covered roof killed in fall through skylight.
||Worker died after falling on showroom floor.
||Worker killed in fall from top of boat.
||Worker killed in fall from roof.
||Worker killed in fall from flatbed trailer.
||Worker on roof killed in fall through skylight.
||Worker slipped and suffered fatal fall on ice.
||Worker clearing power lines from tree killed in fall from bucket lift.
||Worker fatally engulfed by gravel after falling into silo during cleaning operations.
||Worker killed in fall from ladder.
||Worker killed in fall from ladder.
||Worker killed in fall from steel structure.
||Worker killed in fall from Continue Reading…
Hot off the press:
Expected ERAP Rail Tanker Correction
As expected, the Dec. 31/14 TDG amendment was corrected in today’s Canada Gazette II to specify that rail ERAP requirements apply to rail tank cars only.*
You can read the correction here:
No signature- clarification
Also the FAQ section of the TDG website has been revised to clarify that July’s addition of Consignor’s Certification (TDGR 3.6.1, mandatory July 1, 2015) does not require an actual signature (see answer to the second question under “Documentation…). **
*We still expect an amendment to clarify the intent regarding inapplicability to road transport-see author’s Blog of January 13th:
** Ironically what took the Author a few hundred words or so to “unofficially interpret” in a Blog last October, was accomplished by Transport Canada in the phrase “…(not signature)…” in the FAQ!
New proposal to increase aircraft cargo security
Transport Canada has, in an effort to improve safety on passenger aircraft, proposed additions to the Canadian Aviation Security Regulations under Part 4.85 of the Aeronautics Act to streamline screening of cargo for “threat items” (Canada Gazette Part I, November 1, 2014). Threat items include “any … good that could pose a threat to aviation security” in addition to explosives, incendiary devices and their components, when shipped as cargo without being documented on a waybill, shipper’s declaration, etc. Presumably dangerous goods would be prime candidates for threat items.
As well as the addition of “threat items” to the section 3 definitions, the new Part 11 on “Air Cargo” includes the proposed detailed provisions for the improved security programs in new sections 668 to 686.
These changes would provide for “known consignors” (shippers) &/or “certified agents” (cargo/warehouse/trucking third parties), to undertake formal security activities in screening or maintaining the chain of custody of cargo destined for transport on passenger aircraft. This would supplement the current program activities undertaken by the air carrier or regulated agent (approved participant).
Participation in the program by shippers (to facilitate efficient shipment) and agents (as a value-added service) will be voluntary, but those who choose to do so will be held to the stringent prescribed requirements under penalties that will range from $3000 to $5000 for individuals and $10000-$25000 Continue Reading…
Updated Safety Marks
Reliable sources have indicated that the December 2012 proposal to overhaul placarding and other safety markings is expected to be published in the Canada Gazette Part II on Wednesday, July 2, 2014.
This amendment is intended to improve the harmonization between the marking requirements in the Canadian TDGR (Transportation of Dangerous Goods Regulations) and the various current international (UN Recommendations, 49CFR, ICAO, and IMDG) regulations.
Although not an exhaustive list, significant changes, based on the original Gazette I notice, include: introduction of defined “overpacks” and their markings, implications in the LQ (“Limited Quantity”) provisions, etc.; phasing out of the older Class 5.2, LQ, Marine Pollutant, Fumigation marks in favor of the international versions; relaxation of the need to remove safety marks while any quantity of DG remain; completely re-working the Part 4.15 placarding requirements, including severely restricting the use of the “Danger” placard (e.g. only for loads of “small means of containment”), limiting the 500 kg exemption options; allowing the use of 2 placards or 4 labels (with UN #s) on IBC (“intermediate bulk containers”) totes; adding a requirement to mark “toxic-inhalation hazard” on Special Provision 23 DG packages; and other changes.
Word has it that the amendment will take effect July 14, although (again based on the original proposal) there may be transitional provisions for some aspects.
ICC is always up to date with current workplace Continue Reading…