Regulatory Helpdesk: February 5

Labels, Placards, Segregation, Documentation, SDSs & Emergency Response

Welcome back to the Regulatory Helpdesk where we answer your dangerous goods & hazmat questions. We’re here to help you become independent with – and understand the whys and hows – of the regulations.

Here are the top 6 questions from last week.

SDS and Workplace Labels

Q. If I have a product like a concentrated cleaner which is corrosive to the eyes and skin that I water down at my facility, do I need a new SDS and workplace labeling?
A. You have 2 options. You can use the SDS as provided to create your workplace labeling. This may cause concern with your workers. However, it would be better for you to develop your own and re-evaluate the product using the hazards presented in the watered-down version. It is possible, depending on how diluted it is, to move into the irritation or non-hazardous range.

Listing Canutec or Chemtrec on Lithium Battery Marks

Q. Regarding the new battery mark, am I allowed to add “in case of emergency, contact Chemtrec”?
A. The regulations are pretty clear (DOT §173.185(c)(3) and IATA 7.1.5.5). What should be listed there is a phone number for “additional information”. There should be no extra phrasing other than phone number itself. As for listing Chemtrec, Infotrac or even Canutec, those are 3rd party Emergency Response Providers and would not be appropriate to include in that section of Continue Reading…
Regulatory Helpdesk: January 29

WHMIS Labels Format, How ICAO and IATA are Related, Shipping Residues, and IATA Documentation

Welcome back to the Regulatory Helpdesk where we answer your dangerous goods & hazmat questions. We’re here to help you become independent with – and understand the whys and hows – of the regulations.

WHMIS Labels Format

Q. Is there a specified format for WHMIS 2015 workplace labels?
A. No. The information is specified but not the format. Pictograms may assist employees in quickly identifying the hazards/precautions; and may simplify employer creation of substitute “supplier” labels.

This is especially true when employees have been trained in the GHS-based WHMIS 2015 system. Employers must ensure training has been provided if GHS pictograms are used on workplace labels during the transition period.

ICAO/IATA Relationship

Q. Is a risk of non-compliance in using IATA DGR given that government regulations specify compliance with ICAO Technical instructions?
A. IATA DGR states in §1.14 that they contain all of the ICAO TI requirements and add additional restrictions. Thus, complying with IATA DGR will ensure compliance with ICAO TI. As with all regulations, it is important to keep aware of amendments/corrigenda between publication dates.

Shipping Residues (TDG)

Q. When we are shipping residues…. Can we and how do we indicate ‘Residue last contained’ on the transport document.
A. If the quantity of dangerous goods in a means of containment is less than 10 per cent of the Continue Reading…
TDG
Standard TP14850 Pre-Canada Gazette (CG) I Consultation

Truck Driving on highway at sunset

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…

Regulatory Helpdesk: January 22, 2018

Shipping Alkaline Batteries, IBC Pressure Gauges, and SDS Expiry Under WHMIS 2015

Welcome back to the Regulatory Helpdesk where we answer your dangerous goods & hazmat questions. We’re here to help you become independent with – and understand the whys and hows – of the regulations.

Shipping Spent Alkaline Batteries (49 CFR)

Q. Can spent alkaline batteries (Duracell) be shipped to a recycling facility by ground without being declared dangerous goods?
A. Assuming that these are dry alkaline batteries that are used or spent for recycling, they are not required to be shipped as dangerous goods by ground in the USA per 172.102 Provision 130 (d) provided they are rated under 9 volts per below.

Ground Transport (US DOT): 49 CFR 172.102 SPECIAL PROVISION 130

Used or spent battery exception. Used or spent dry batteries of both non-rechargeable and rechargeable designs, with a marked rating up to 9-volt that are combined in the same package and transported by highway or rail for recycling, reconditioning, or disposal are not subject to this special provision or any other requirement of the HMR.

Pressure Gauge Requirements for IBCs

Q. What are the pressure gauge testing requirements for 31A IBCs?
A. I referred the customer to 178.814 d (1) (2) which lists 2 consecutive tests that must be administered with a rating of 65kPa first followed by 200kPa.

Can You Use Capital Letters (TDG)?

Q. Do Continue Reading…
Regulatory Helpdesk: January 15, 2018

Here are the top 4 questions last week:

Welcome back to the Regulatory Helpdesk where we answer your dangerous goods & hazmat questions. We’re here to help you become independent with – and understand the whys and hows – of the regulations.

Worded Label Requirements

Q. Are worded labels required for use in US transport?
A. Based on 172.405(a), except where prescribed, wording is optional on US hazard class labels.

Placement of UN Number, Shipping Name and Hazard Class Label

Q. Can you put the “ISH” information (shipping name, UN number and hazard label) on the top of a package (e.g. box)?
A. That depends. Different regulations express it differently, but the key message is that the information must be easily located and read; and with few exceptions in proximity to each other on the same surface of the package. All common regulations (49 CFR, Canadian TDGR, IATA DGR, IMDG Code) have a general requirement for legibility.

49 CFR requires the information to be clearly visible on a surface other than the bottom [172.304(f) and 172.304(a)(i)]- so the top could be allowed if the configuration resulted in it being clearly visible.

IATA DGR and the IMDG Code do not specify top/bottom but only require the information to be “readily visible” [IATA 7.2.6.1(a); IMDG 5.2.1.2.1, 5.2.2,1.6].

TDGR, however, is a little more prescriptive- requiring the information to be “on any side … other than the side on Continue Reading…

TDG
TDG Marine Amendment Clarified (SOR/2017-253)

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…

Regulatory Helpdesk: January 8, 2018

3 Questions from our Regulatory Helpdesk

Welcome back to the Regulatory Helpdesk where we answer your dangerous goods & hazmat questions. We’re here to help you become independent with – and understand the whys and hows – of the regulations.

Disclosing Concentration Ranges Under WHMIS 2015

Q. Do I have to indicate “Proprietary” on a WHMIS (M)SDS when masking actual concentrations with ranges?
A. It depends. WHMIS 1988 accepted the use of concentration ranges on MSDS to mask confidential business information (CBI) without requiring any indication.

WHMIS 2015 does not currently allow the use of ranges other than the concentration range actually present for a variable substance (also, unlike WHMIS 1988, ranges cannot be used to allow a single SDS for a series of different but similar products).

Products subject to an approved masking under the HMIR Act do have to, in both versions, reference the exemption authorization on the (M)SDS.

A CBI amendment under consideration may re-introduce the permissible use of ranges to unilaterally mask actual concentrations. This proposal as currently written requires a statement in the SDS when a range is used that’s wider than the actual concentration range, to protect CBI. We’ll have to wait for the final amendment to answer the question going forward …

IMDG or TDG?

Q. Does a shipment within Canada by vessel from Newfoundland require placarding according to the IMDG Code or do the provisions of the TDGR Continue Reading…
Lithium Battery
Lithium Battery Placarding and Segregation

Lithium Batteries, Laptop battery

Lithium Battery Segregation

It is January and all of the new or updated transport regulations are in full swing. This includes the new IATA addendums and IMDG Code corrigenda that were recently published. That leaves many tracking down what changed in and how those changes could impact business. Add to that dealing with the complexities that come with shipping lithium batteries and many people end up feeling confused like Vincent “Vinny” Barbarino on “Welcome Back Kotter”. Check out that memory.

Here is my attempt to simplify the placarding and segregation requirements as they now stand for lithium batteries. Let’s take a look at each topic and regulation to sort things out.

49 CFR – US Ground

Placarding (§172.504): Class 9 materials are found on Table 2. This indicates that when the gross aggregate weight of the materials in the transport vehicle reaches 1001 pounds (454 kilograms) placards would be needed. In Paragraph (f)(9) there is an exception. The exception tells us that placards are not needed for Class 9 materials shipped domestically. Easy right? Now this paragraph also tells us that should you use a bulk packaging of batteries, we would be required to mark the identification number on an orange panel, a white square-on-point configuration or a Class 9 placard.

Segregation and Separation Chart of Hazardous Materials (§177.848): There is currently nothing in this section of 49 CFR to indicate batteries should be segregated or Continue Reading…

Regulatory Helpdesk: January 1, 2018

3 Questions from our Regulatory Helpdesk

Welcome back to the Regulatory Helpdesk where we answer your dangerous goods & hazmat questions. Check back weekly, the helpdesk rarely hears the same question twice.

Location of the To/From Address

Q: Can the name and address of the shipper and/or receiver be on top of packages of hazardous materials?
A: For 49 CFR only 1 address is needed and for air you would need both. Ocean doesn’t specifically mention addresses but we tend to include one since most carriers are going to ask for it. None of the regulations actually state where they MUST go. In some of our older trainings it was indicated that the addresses had to be near the name and number. I’ve tried to correct that.

  • For Air – Section 7.1.4.1(b) – both addresses “located on the same surface of the package near the proper shipping name mark, if the package dimensions are adequate
  • 49 CFR – Only one address is required per 172.301(d)
  • IMDG – There are no set guidelines for including addresses in Section 5.

New Segregation of Lithium Batteries

Q: Do lithium batteries have to be segregated?
A: It depends on the mode of transport.

In 49 CFR and IMDG 38-16, there are no segregation requirements for batteries. There could be information on a batteries SDS that should be followed.

For Air, in the new 59th edition of IATA or as some call it the 2018 version, there is some Continue Reading…

TDG
Sailing, Sailing – TDGR Part 11 Marine Amendment – Etc.

Red semi truck on highway

Transport Canada issues new Part 11 and makes other miscellaneous changes

SOR/2017-253

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.

Marine Amendment

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”:
http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-10.15/page-1.html#h-2

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…