UNITED

NATIONS	ST

Secretariat	Distr.

GENERAL

ST/SG/AC.10/1998/57

12 October 1998

ENGLISH

Original: ENGLISH AND FRENCH
COMMITTEE OF EXPERTS ON THE

TRANSPORT OF DANGEROUS GOODS

(Twentieth session,

Geneva, 7-16 December l998,

agenda item 2(c))

WORK OF THE SUB-COMMITTEE OF EXPERTS

ON THE TRANSPORT OF DANGEROUS GOODS

Draft amendments to the Recommendations on the Transport of Dangerous Goods

Note by the secretariat

on behalf of the RID/ADR/ADN Joint Meeting

(15-25 September 1998)

Introduction

1.	The Joint Meeting of the RID Safety Committee and the Working Party on the Transport of Dangerous Goods of the Economic Commission for Europe held a session in Geneva from 15 to 25 September 1998.

2.	At that session, the following points were raised which the UN/ECE Secretariat was requested to bring to the attention of the UN Committee of Experts on the Transport of Dangerous Goods on behalf of the RID/ADR/ADN Joint Meeting.

GE.98-

Points raised

Classification of solutions of solid compounds

3.	In the rationalized approach for the assignment of RID/ADR tank types to groups of substances (see Annex 2 to document TRANS/WP.15/AC.1/1998/25), solid substances such as 3284 Tellurium compound, n.o.s. have been assigned to a particular tank type (L4BH). However, it is not clear whether solutions of the compounds in question can be classified under the same UN entries, and thus assigned to the same tank type. The substances in question are currently classified as Class 6.1, items 57 (b,c), 58 (b,c), 59 (c), 60 (b,c), 61 (b,c), 62 (c), 64 (c) and 66 (b).

4.	The UN Committee's views are sought on how solutions of the above compounds should be classified in the context of the assignment to tank types.

Chapter 4.1- Packing Instructions

5.	Packing instructions were discussed at an informal working group of the UN Sub-
Committee of Experts in Frankfurt from 7-11 September 1998. The Joint Meeting discussed the results of the Frankfurt working group on 14 September in Geneva at an informal session, and it was recommended that the Joint Meeting adopt the packing instructions reviewed in Frankfurt.

6.	However, the Joint Meeting informal working group felt that certain instructions raised problems that had not been resolved in Frankfurt, and those points were submitted to the Joint Meeting for action. It was pointed out that there were differences between RID/ADR and the IMDG Code, as well as between the RID/ADR/IMDG Code and the United Nations Recommendations, and that multimodal instructions could also be obtained if RID/ADR and the IMDG Code were harmonized. It was felt that if the United Nations multimodal instructions were to be used, they should constitute a standard providing for the highest level of safety.

7.	The Joint Meeting decided to request the United Nations Committee of Experts, as in the case of portable tanks, to prepare packing instructions based on the most stringent existing requirements - except with regard to air transport. The different modes of transport can subsequently make the requirements more flexible where appropriate.

Chapter 5.2 - Marking and labelling

8.	With regard to primary and subsidiary risks, the secretariat reported at the Joint Meeting on the progress made on this question in the Sub-Committee of Experts, which took a decision of principle no longer to make a distinction between primary and subsidiary risks. The Joint Meeting also expressed the wish that there should cease to be a distinction between primary and subsidiary risks, and should like the Committee of Experts to take account of this in reaching its final decision.

Marking of packages with the proper shipping name (5.2.1.1)

9.	The Joint Meeting recalled that the proper shipping name marking was required in RID/ADR only for classes 1 and 7, whereas the Model Regulations require it for all classes, as does the IMDG Code (in one chosen language) and the ICAO Technical Instructions (in English only). Considering the many languages spoken in Europe, such a marking made little sense for RID/ADR. It was therefore suggested that the elimination of such markings should be proposed to the Committee of Experts. The Joint Meeting therefore proposes that the beginning of paragraph 5.2.1.1 of the Model Regulations should be amended to read:

"Unless otherwise provided in these Regulations, the proper shipping name for the dangerous goods as determined in accordance with 3.1.2 and the corresponding UN Number preceded by the letters 'UN', shall be displayed on each package containing goods of classes 1 or 7. Packages containing goods of any other Class shall display only the UN Number preceded by the letters 'UN'. In the case of unpackaged articles...." (Remainder unchanged).

Chapter 6.5 - IBCs

10.	The Joint Meeting raised the question of what exactly was meant by the term `operation' in 6.5.1.1.3 and why it applied only to IBCs. The Joint Meeting expressed concern that each competent authority might interpret `operation' as it saw fit, once it was incorporated into RID/ADR/ADN. Since it was not known which operations were actually involved, the UN Committee of Experts is invited to provide some clarification as to how this term should be interpreted.

______________