Health Canada Amendment to the HPR (Hazardous Product Regulations)
Health Canada published a proposed amendment to the HPR (Hazardous Product Regulations), which included an option to use specified concentration ranges for ingredients rather than the exact or actual chemical concentration on their SDSs (safety data sheets) (October 21, 2017).
That proposed amendment to allow ranges, would offer industry some Confidential Business Information (CBI) protection of formulations without having to go through a potentially costly CBI application claim under the Hazardous Materials Information Review Act (HMIRA).
After receiving comments and questions on the proposed amendment to allow the use of concentration ranges on SDSs, Health Canada has advised that the amendment has been approved and registered as of April 4, 2018. The approved amendment has yet to appear in the official Gazette II publication, but is expected to appear on April 18, 2018. Since it is officially registered, the amendment is effective, and can be applied, now.
Health Canada, through this new amendment, is giving the option to suppliers, to list prescribed concentration ranges for ingredients on SDSs, without having to apply for a potentially costly exemption, in accordance with the HMIRA.
Suppliers may use this option when they wish to protect exact concentrations, or ‘actual concentration ranges’, which they feel are trade secrets.
The following are the approved, prescribed, list of concentration ranges:
New Transport Canada Update Means Big Changes for Many Companies
Recently, Transport Canada posted on their FAQ web page, a few questions regarding shipping mixtures of Methanol.
The first three FAQs are for the most part, not surprising, with one exception in Question 2. These FAQ’s appear as follows (these FAQ’s are directly from their website): (keep reading, the biggest surprise is coming).
Question: How do I classify a product that contains methanol as the only dangerous good?
Answer:As per Section 2.3 of the TDG Regulations, when the name of a dangerous good is shown in Schedule 1, that name and the corresponding data for that shipping name (class, subsidiary class(es), packing group (PG)) must be used. Therefore, when methanol is the only dangerous good in the product and it meets the criteria for Class 3, Flammable Liquids, it should be transported as UN1230, METHANOL, Class 3 (6.1), PG II. Note that PG II is the only packing group available for methanol as per Schedule 1 of the TDG Regulations.Note:Subparagraph 1.3(2)(d)(iv) of the TDG Regulations allows a person to indicate the word “SOLUTION” or “MIXTURE” and also the concentration of the solution or mixture after the shipping name, as applicable.
Question: Tests results for a solution containing methanol as the only dangerous good indicate that its packing group should be III. How do I choose the proper shipping name?
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.
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.
When receiving inbound calls at our regulatory help desk, one of the most popular inquiries involves filling out various types of paperwork when shipping dangerous goods.
If you are looking to ship dangerous goods by air, you could now be facing a different type of compliance check involving your shipper’s declaration in the near future. The International Air Transport Association (IATA) unveiled a digital product allowing air cargo providers an easier way to verify that a shipper tendering dangerous goods has met the industry’s standards for transporting hazardous goods. Their new product is called Dangerous Goods AutoCheck (DG AutoCheck).
What is this new Digital Product?
This new Dangerous Goods Auto Check system is designed as a digital means of checking the compliance of goods designated under the Shipper’s Declaration. This tool will allow direct receipt of electronic consignment data and will automatically check the information contained in the Shipper’s Declaration against the relevant language in the IATA regulations governing the handling and transport of the goods.
Simply scan or upload the dangerous goods declaration into the tablet-based tool. That’s it!
The tool will simplify a ground handler’s or airline’s decision to accept or reject a shipment during the physical inspection stage by providing a visual representation of the package with the correct marking and labelling required for transport based on the information electronically provided Continue Reading…
If you are supplying chemical products that require Safety Data Sheets (SDS’s) to multiple countries, you are also likely to know this headache well.
With the implementation of the Globally Harmonized System of Classification & Labeling (GHS) around the world progressing, issues are beginning to appear which emphasize points where…. Maybe requirements are not so ‘harmonized’. One such issue, is ingredient disclosure requirements on SDS’s for mixtures across different regions of the world.
The United Nation’s (UN’s) GHS system, does contain some standardized recommendations for SDS, including that SDS’s should be provided only for chemicals classified as ‘hazardous’, SDS’s should contain basic minimum information (e.g., 16 sections with specific headings), as well as more detailed recommended guidance on how to prepare each section of the SDS.
Ingredient disclosure recommendations, in particular, appear in Annex 4 of the GHS. In general, the GHS recommends that for a mixture classified as hazardous, the SDS should list all ‘hazardous’ ingredients, which are individually hazardous to health or the environment, when the ingredients are present above concentration cutoff levels. There’s several parts of that general requirement, which can be viewed as a ‘can of worms’.
Are the cutoff levels the same for each region of the world? How should one handle ingredient disclosure when you are in a region that doesn’t regulate environmental hazards on SDS’s? Are ‘non-hazardous’ chemical mixtures really not Continue Reading…
UPS Makes Changes to its International Special Commodities (ISC) Program
UPS has announced it will be making changes to its International Special Commodifies (ISC) Program which enables selected customers under contract to ship certain prohibited articles.
This initiative has added more than 50 countries that can ship biological substances, shipments utilizing dry ice, and goods in excepted quantities internationally.
What does this Include?
UPS will now pick up and deliver packages containing UN3373 (Biologic Substances, Category B, Diagnostic Specimen and Clinical Specimen) as well as UN1845 (Carbon Dioxide, solid or dry ice) to 51 added countries and territories bringing the total number of countries to over 100.
In addition, the countries that were added to the list can now ship dangerous goods in excepted quantities internationally if authorized by the regulations.
Dangerous goods shipped in excepted quantities allow relief from certain regulations in small quantities outlined by IATA in §2.6. Be sure to check IATA for specific details and to use the label below when shipping in excepted quantities.
Where can I find packaging for UN3373 Category B Specimens and dry ice shipments?
At ICC we have a wide variety of packaging specifically designed for biological packaging as well as dry ice shippers for international shipments similar to the kit below:
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…
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.
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…