| January 13, 2015 HAZMAT ROB |
||||||
|
||||||
|
I am not surprised that I am still being asked if the old National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) and American Coatings Association (ACA) HMIS labeling systems that use color codes and numerical rankings of hazards will meet the new GHS Hazard Communication container labels regulations. The answer, unfortunately, is no. |
||||||
PARTY RESPONSIBLY |
||||||
|
Manufacturers, distributors and other responsible parties are allowed to display anything, including the NFPA and HMIS labels on a container as long as it is not inconsistent with the Department of Labor Hazard Communication Regulations in 29 CFR 1910.1200. Unfortunately, many of the old private and non-government organizations’ labeling recommendations do not meet the requirements of the new GHS container labels. |
||||||
SAY WHAT? |
||||||
|
I believe that most individuals do not really understand what the National Fire Protection Association or the American Coatings Association are and what authority they possess. These industry groups, in many cases, are private, non-profit and/or non-government associations who set industry standards, then sell their guidelines and recommendations in books, journals or online. They can also be funded by charging membership fees, and providing or accrediting paid certifications for various industrial applications or regulatory requirements. Their guidelines may be, at some point, incorporated into the government regulations, but these groups have no authority to promulgate or enforce government regulations. |
||||||
ANSI Z129.1 CONTAINER LABELS |
||||||
|
In the preamble to the Hazard Communication regulations, OSHA states that “a common label format used by industry was that provided by the ANSI Z129, Hazardous Industrial Chemicals—Precautionary Labeling Standard.” This might have been fine if they met all the new requirements and every organization agreed to use the same non-mandatory recommendations to meet the OSHA Hazard Communication labeling requirements, which not all organizations do. |
||||||
CAN YOU SPARE A ($100) BUCK |
||||||
|
I know that the old NFPA and HMIS container labels do not meet the new GHS label requirements. What about the above mentioned American National Standards Institute Z129.1 Hazardous Industrial Chemicals- Precautionary Labeling Standard? I don’t think so, but to be honest, I am not about to spend the $100 it costs to buy their book just to find out. The hundreds of pages of OSHA’s Proposed Rules, Final Rules, Preambles, 1910.1200 Regulation, SDS and Container mandatory information and format can be found at no cost on the US Government Printing Office website. |
||||||
OLD IS NEW |
||||||
|
Before GHS under the old container labeling system, the Hazardous Materials Information System (HMIS) and the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) labeling systems both met and exceeded the 1910.1200 Hazard Communication Regulations. But not any more. Now under the new GHS standard the container labels must display the chemical’s: (i) product identifier, (ii) signal word, (iii) hazard statement(s), (iv) pictogram( s), (v) precautionary statement(s) and (vi) name, address and telephone number of the responsible party (based on the hazard classes and categories of the material.) |
||||||
*Hazard classification/category information not mandatory |
||||||
WHAT’S NEW |
||||||
|
The biggest difference between the new GHS and the old Hazard Communication Regulations would have to be the now mandatory Appendix C Label Elements – information with the new pictograms, along with Appendix A Health Hazards (tests), Appendix B Physical Hazards (tests) and Appendix D the Safety Data Sheet (format and information). OSHA didn’t change 1910.1200 as much as they added Appendices A, B, C and D, and made some SDS information and the container labels information mandatory. |
||||||
GHS LABELS AND SAFETY DATA SHEETS |
||||||
|
When preparing a new SDS, use Appendices A, B, C and D to determine the information that appears in Section 1 and Section 2 of the Safety Data Sheet (SDS). Then use the information in Section 1 and Section 2 of the SDS to determine what mandatory information must appear on the new OSHA GHS container labels. Then use the old MSDS to extrapolate the rest of the information needed to complete Sections 3 thru 16. |
||||||
|
I would like to hear from you if you are still not sure of how, what, when, which or where the new GHS labels affect you or if you are having trouble with the new GHS SDSs, so give us a ring or drop us a line and we will be glad to get you back on track. Thank you for your readership and support. |
Author: Rob Keegan
PreventionEBOLA. DOT TAKES UP THE FIGHT
| January 8, 2015 HAZMAT ROB |
|
|
When some of America’s finest hospitals, universities and military facilities are your customers, it is not hard to feel a tremendous amount of pride and satisfaction in your job. That is not to say that I don’t have just as much admiration for those in healthcare, medical research and protection organizations in the private sector. But it is the public workforce who are asked to be first on the scene as the general public flees from these perceived hot zones. OSHA wrote the 1910.120 HAZWOPER and 1910.1030 Bloodborne Pathogens Regulations to protect the private workforce from hazardous substances such as Hepatitis, AIDS, antibiotic resistant bacteria. And DOT protects transportation with “infectious substances” and “regulated medical wastes” hazardous material shipping names in the 172.101 Table. However, most of these Federal, State and Local government workers are not so protected. The regulations cover only the private workforce, not the public. And that is not going to change, but recently DOT has offered some guidelines in the Federal Register for those public workers and cut some red tape for private sector workers who we often asked to take up these difficult and dangerous new challenges. |
|
EBOLA |
|
Now, as we fight to control the Ebola virus, which has decimated thousands of individuals, families and communities around the world, many of our same customers are on the forefront of a new battle. So to aid in the fight, DOT has issued guidance for those who may not normally fall under the DOT HMR because they are Federal, State, or Local government employees to aid in the safe operation of motor vehicles, aircraft, or vessels solely for non-commercial Federal, State, or Local government purposes. |
|
PUBLIC WORKS |
|
As strange as it may seem, DOT does not regulate the transportation of uncontaminated blood under the Hazardous Materials Regulations. But the infectious substance definition in 49 CFR 173.133 clearly classifies any material contaminated or suspected of being contaminated with Ebola as a Category A infectious substance. These hazardous materials under DOT and hazardous substances under OSHA must be handled, packaged and treated properly, regardless of whether the employee is private or public. |
|
DOT GUIDANCE |
|
So in an October Federal Register, DOT provided some general guidance and information, without addressing the specific provisions and exceptions contained in the HMR. This guidance and information should not be a substitute for strict compliance with the HMR. DOT always recommends full compliance when transporting any hazardous material or waste generated from the treatment of a patient contaminated or suspected of being contaminated with the Ebola virus, transported by a Federal, state, or local government employee, even though they may not be subject to the HMR. |
|
EBOLA BEST SELLER LIST |
|
In the Federal Register, DOT’s Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration has compiled and recommends the use of the following guidance documents: |
|
|
For more information on the HMR requirements see: phmsa.dot.gov/hazmat/transporting-infectious-substances. |
|
BUT WAIT, THERE’S MORE |
|
In addition, to aid with the transport of the larger volume of contaminated waste generated during the treatment of Ebola patients and materials contaminated or suspected of being contaminated with the Ebola virus, Special Permit DOT–SP 16279 provides certain carriers with alternative authorized packaging options. DOT will allow a company to become a party to a special permit if the applicant can demonstrate that their alternative packaging will achieve a safety level that is at least equal to the safety level required. |
|
SPECIAL PERMIT EMERGENCY PROCESSING |
|
The special permit allows for a variance from the HMR packaging requirements in 173.196(a). If necessary, DOT can provide emergency processing of Special Permit DOT–SP 16279 to prevent significant injury to persons or property not preventable under normal processing, national security, or to prevent significant economic loss. To qualify for emergency processing, the application must provide specific criteria including the potential impact if the special permit is not granted. Waste haulers may apply for party status to Special Permit DOT–SP 16279 per 49 CFR 107.107. |
|
CDC PRE-TRANSPORTATION |
|
For guidance on how to handle infectious substances before transporting them, DOT refers you to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. It should be noted that any Ebola contaminated materials that have been appropriately incinerated, autoclaved, or otherwise inactivated are not considered Category A infectious substances and are not subject to the requirements of the HMR. |
|
HMR CONTACT |
| For questions on specific HMR requirements, DOT encourages you to contact the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration’s (PHMSA) Hazardous Materials Information Center at 1-800- 467-4922, 9 a.m.–5 p.m. Eastern time or Magdy El-Sibaie, Associate Administrator for Hazardous Materials Safety, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration.
Regardless of your status as a private or public worker, if you have any questions or comments, you can always call or write me. We would love to hear from you. Thank you for your readership and support. |
SINK OR SWIM
| January 2015 HAZMAT ROB |
|
|
I love January because that is when I travel to Honolulu and San Juan to run my annual Hazardous Materials & Waste Seminars and IATA Dangerous Goods by Air Seminars. Since these are both islands, I always like to check DOT 49 CFR 172.101 Hazardous Material Table’s Appendix B – Marine Pollutant List for additions or changes to the rule. The marine pollutant regulations, when they were originally incorporated into the HMR in the 1990’s, were only for vessels like boats, ships and barges. Although many countries regulated marine pollutants in all modes, air, ground and water, the US initially decided to only regulate marine pollutants in the water mode. |
|
RAILCAR MEETS RIVER |
|
Shortly thereafter, a marine pollutant being shipped in railcars out in California rolled off the track, down the bank and broke open into the Sacramento River which 47 miles later flows into Shasta Lake, one of the most beautiful, largest reservoirs and its third-largest body of water after Lake Tahoe and the Salton Sea. After killing everything in the river, DOT decided that the marine pollutant regulations should not be for just water shipments. They decided to regulate bulk containers of marine pollutants in all modes. All bulk containers over 119 gallons, 882 pounds or 1000 gal water capacity for gases each meeting the definition of a marine pollutant or a severe marine pollutant in 171.8 would now be marine pollutants when transported in all modes. |
|
TESTED |
|
The IMDG maintains a list of marine pollutants, allows for bridging and includes alternative methods for determining if a material is a marine pollutant in their requirements for international shippers. However, they could at some point require the shipper to run a test. A LAYMAN’S GUIDE TO UNDERSTANDING THE PRINCIPLES OF CLASSIFYING MARINE POLLUTANTS UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF IMDG CODE AMENDMENT 34-08 at www.ivodga.com/notices/2008/MarinePollutants.htm decribes the marine pollutant test as follows: “The test guidelines set out by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) provide the method for exposing a specified number and species of fish within an allowable size tolerance to a 96 hour test where the water in which the fish is to be tested contains 1 mg or less per liter of water of the substance to be tested for toxicity. If 50% of the test population of fish expire within the 96 hours (LC50) the tested substance would meet the criteria for acute toxicity in Category 1. The test can also be conducted using the same concentration of the substance in water where crustacea are exposed for 48 hours and the test population experience the effective concentration (EC50) that causes 50% of the maximum response (fatalities). A similar test concentration using algae or other aquatic plants demonstrating a reduction in growth (ErC50) may be used to determine if the substance is within category acute.” |
|
LISTED IN APPENDIX B |
|
For domestic shipments DOT does not require shippers to run the OECD tests. Shippers are allowed to reference Appendix B to 172.101 – Hazardous Material Table instead of running the tests. This was all covered in a previous blog (Marine Pollutants). |
|
NOMINATED FOR CONSIDERATION |
|
Now, Allyl alcohol; Ammonia, anhydrous; Creosote salts; Heptanes; Hexane; and Octanes have all been nominated for inclusion in the Marine Pollutant List in Appendix B in the Aug. 25, 2014 Proposed Rule under HM-215M. These materials, along with fifty-six other new entries, have been proposed because they have been determined to meet the Group of Experts on the Scientific Aspects of Marine Environmental Protection’s (GESAMP) definition of a marine pollutant consistent with the IMDG Code. |
|
CATCH AND RELEASE |
|
.Not only are there proposed additions to the Marine Pollutant List, there is also one chemical that will be removed. Under this proposed rule the entry ‘‘Chlorotoluenes (meta-;para-)’’ will be delisted based on its removal from the IMDG Code. You can check out the other marine pollutant additions by reviewing the Federal Register at www.hazmatpublishing.com/RegulatoryUpdates/pdf/2014-19161.pdf |
|
PROPOSED RULE – APPENDIX B OR TEST |
| Where does DOT say in the regulations that you may use the List in Appendix B, as opposed to run the OECD test? Well there is a provision in Appendix B, before you get to the Marine Pollutant List, in Paragraph 4 that states, “If a material is not listed in this appendix but meets the criteria for a marine pollutant as provided in Chapter 2.9 of the IMDG Code, (incorporated by reference; see §171.7 of this subchapter), the material may be transported as a marine pollutant in accordance with the applicable requirements of this subchapter.”
We have been running the seminar in Honolulu and San Juan for the last 42 years and it is always special not just because of the sun and surfing, but because the people are always so warm and welcoming. Even if you don’t live or get to work on an island but you have a question on marine pollutants, let us give you a hand. Thank you for your readership and support. If you have questions or comments, call or email us. |
DAMNED IF YOU DO AND DAMNED IF YOU DON’T
| December 2014 HAZMAT ROB |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I got a call recently about the hazmat registration fees under the Department of Transportation for anyone who offers or accepts for transportation certain hazard classes and quantities of hazardous materials in foreign, interstate or intrastate commerce. Explicitly, the question was how far back does one have to register? One year, two years or do I have to register for all past years that I have not registered? |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
HOW FAR BACK? |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I am not sure how far the DOT would go to investigate any claims made by a registrant. But, I know that hazardous waste manifests must be kept for 3 years under EPA and DOT in 172.201 and hazmat bills of lading must be kept at least 2 years (while various sources recommend they should be kept for at least seven years.) I can tell you I would certainly not test their resolve and I would make every effort to be accurate. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
WHO MUST REGISTER? |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Per 49 CFR 107.608, the registration and fee requirements apply to anyone who “offers” for transportation or “transports”, in foreign, interstate or intrastate commerce: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The term “shipment” means the offering or loading of hazardous material at one loading facility using one transport vehicle, or the transport of that transport vehicle. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
IF YOU HAVE NOT REGISTERED… |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
You will not be rewarded for not registering for past years. Not only do you have to register for past years and pay the associated fees, you could also be fined for years that you failed to register. Registration fees are based on the size and status of your organization; small businesses and not-for-profits pay up to $250 a year, less than everyone else which could be as much as $2,575. The fees and years are listed as follows: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1 Fee appropriate for small or other than small business. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
IN ADDITION |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Each person submitting a registration statement must pay a processing fee of $25 for registration years 2000-2001 and later for each registration statement filed. A single statement may be filed for one, two, or three registration years. For registration years 1999-2000 and earlier, the processing fee would be $50 for each registration statement filed, and a separate statement must be filed for each year. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
PENALTIES |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| The enforcement of registration could be conducted cooperatively by federal, state, and local agencies which means that federal, state, or local officials could impose the penalties for failing to register or failing to meet the recordkeeping requirements. The following are baselines which would only go up and could include jail time, if the inspector felt that it was a willful violation. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| LIST OF FREQUENTLY CITED VIOLATIONS | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
STAMP OR EMAIL |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| The form may also be filled out electronically on the DOT Web site or printed out, and mailed with payment. Completed registration forms and payment should be mailed together to: U.S. Department of Transportation, Hazardous Materials Registration. P.O. Box 530273, Atlanta, GA 30353-0273. You can also submit electronically at phmsa.dot.gov/hazmat/registration. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| I’ll be damned if I could find him any exceptions, interpretations, or special permits that would alleviate any of the financial burden for the compounded fees and fines that could quickly add up. If you know of any out there that I have missed, let me know and I will pass it on to my readers. In the meantime, if you have a question or comment give us a call. Hope to see you in one of my in-houses or regular seminars in Baltimore, Philadelphia, Honolulu or San Juan coming up January. Thank you for readership and support. |
“ON ACCIDENT”
| December 2014 HAZMAT ROB |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| When my children were every small, Katharine, Taylor and Ethan were a handful for my wife Erin. With all the travelling for my seminars, Erin was the one who took care of everything, including Katharine’s severe and life threatening asthma and allergies. Because of this, Katharine was not as able to take part in many activities. So, she started to read at a very early age. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
KATHARINE |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Katharine is quick as a whip, which could get her in trouble sometimes. When still very young, when Katharine would find herself in trouble, she was always ready with an alibi. On the few occasions that we would have her dead-to-rights or she couldn’t wiggle out of trouble and she could not come up with a plausible excuse for her offense, she still would not admit her fault. Her last resort would be to look you straight in the eye, turn her the palms up and out and simply state it had happened “ON ACCIDENT.” |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
TROUBLE |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
When a hazmat shipper finds himself in trouble, we often get calls to the office asking how much do we think DOT will fine them? It is a very common question for those who have broken a DOT Hazardous Materials Transportation Regulation. We found the best place to look for the baseline amounts is the List of Frequently Cited Violations in Appendix A to Subpart D of Part 107 in 49 CFR. The appendix outlines the baseline amounts for a violation; that is if it is just an honest mistake. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
PERSONNEL |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Office workers, warehouse workers, product-line workers, salespeople and other employees who could comes across any hazardous material in the plant or who might be asked unwittingly to carry out a DOT hazmat function must receive at least the General Awareness training so they know that the company has, uses or ships hazardous materials or waste. The training could also include a review of the Function-Specific training requirements so they would know what DOT hazmat functions they can perform, and more importantly, the functions they can not perform without being further trained and tested. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
EXAMPLE |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Let’s look at the example of a salesman doing a favor for one his accounts, who places a few small bottles of the company’s new food flavoring into an overnight delivery box, then drops the box into a Federal Express kiosk at the airport on his way home because the company’s shipping department closes at 4;30. After all it is just a food product, food! Sure it has some alcohol in it, but the salesman sees the stuff is shipped by ground all the time on the company’s trucks as a non-hazardous material.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
EXCEPTIONS |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
If trained, the employee would know about the regulations on identification, packaging, labeling, marking, placarding and hazmat shipping papers. If trained, he would have known that in 173.150(f)(1) there is an exception in the ground mode for Class 3 Flammable Liquids with flash points over 100 degrees, allowing a shipper to reclassify a Flammable Liquid that flashes over 100 degrees as a Combustible Liquid. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
COMBUSTIBLE |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Then in 173.150(f)(2) the combustible liquid becomes unregulated when shipped by highway in containers below 119 gallons each (non-bulk). However, this exception only applies in the ground mode, not air, where flavorings are regulated because the airlines (or IATA) do not recognize, accept or acknowledge the DOT’’s domestic combustible liquid or their exception.
The salesman has unwittingly violated the regulations. Now the shipper could be fined at the very least for “Shipping an undeclared hazardous material,” “Not providing the proper Hazard Communication Information (shipping paper, marks, labels), Using the wrong container and finally for not being Trained and Tested. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
MISTAKE |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This would not have been a problem if these bottles of flammable liquid had not broken open at 2:00 in the morning at a Federal Express terminal in California, which then had to stop operations until the hazmat team arrived, suited up, determined the danger and carried out the respond to this “UNDECLARED HAZARDOUS MATERIAL SHIPMENT.” And even though no one was hurt and no property damage was done, I was told the DOT initially proposed a $43,000 fine, not for a willful violation, just an honest mistake. The fines and penalties could go up and include jail time if the DOT determines the violation is willful. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
DECISION |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I hope that DOT would realize that a trained employee who is aware of the requirements and repercussions will ask the right questions before they act and would not willfully disregard the requirements. I find that it is the employee that you don’t tell, who gets you in trouble. Because in the end, it might all come down to the fact of whether the DOT thinks you did it willfully or “on accident.” Call us if you need training or have a question on hazardous materials, hazardous substances, marine pollutants, elevated temperatures, hazardous waste or hazardous chemicals under DOT, EPA or OSHA. Or bring it up in one of our upcoming seminars in Oak Lawn, Grand Rapids, and Troy. Thank you for your readership and support. |
PICK YOUR POISON
| December 2014 HAZMAT ROB |
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| In 1927, while attempting to find a way to estimate the poisoning potential of drugs and medicines, J.W. Trevan became the father of the LD50 test. Now, LD50s are used to protect the public in spills, and in writing transportation, environmental and worker protection regulations. One of the best sources for a chemical’s LD50 value would have to be “The Registry of Toxic Effects of Chemical Substances” (RTECS). RTECS was maintained by the US National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) until 2001 for free, but is now only available from the private company Symyx Technologies for a fee or by subscription (per Wikipedia). | ||||||||||||||||
|
HMR POISON VS GHS TOXIC |
||||||||||||||||
|
Now that the Department of Transportation Hazardous Materials Regulations and Occupational Safety and Health Administration Global Harmonization System are both using the the same LD50 tests, I thought I might use LD50s to help you to get started on the new GHS Hazard Communication Regulations. Relax; its should be a breeze, because if the DOT hazardous materials shipping paper states that you are shipping a 6.1 Toxic Material in Packing Group I, the OSHA SDS better say the material is also a Toxic in Category 1 because the DOT and OSHA are now using the same tests. |
||||||||||||||||
|
DOT AND GHS LD50 ORAL TEST |
||||||||||||||||
|
.LD50 (median lethal dose) for acute oral toxicity is the statistically derived single dose of a substance that can be expected to cause death within 14 days in 50% of young adult albino rats when administered orally. The LD50 value is expressed in terms of mass of test substance per mass of test animal (mg/kg). |
||||||||||||||||
|
DOT AND OSHA LD50 DERMAL TEST |
||||||||||||||||
|
. LD50 for acute dermal toxicity means that dose of the material which, administered by continuous contact for 24 hours with the shaved intact skin (avoiding abrading) of an albino rabbit, causes death within 14 days in half of the animals tested. The number of animals tested must be sufficient to give statistically valid results and be in conformity with good pharmacological practices. The result is expressed in mg/kg. |
||||||||||||||||
|
49 CFR DOT HMR PACKING GROUP I, II, III CHART |
||||||||||||||||
|
Packing group means a grouping according to the degree of danger presented by hazardous materials. Packing Group I indicates great danger; Packing Group II, medium danger; Packing Group III, minor danger.
|
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
29 CFR OSHA GHS CATEGORY 1, 2, 3, 4 CHART |
||||||||||||||||
|
Category is the name used to describe the sub-sections of classes. For example, Category 1 indicates the greatest danger; Category 2 upper medium danger; Category 3 lower medium danger and Category 4, minor danger. |
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
LISTEN UP |
||||||||||||||||
|
As I have been telling you for the last 3 years, most of the tests under the HMR are the same tests under GHS. When it comes to Poison or Toxic, toxicity of 5 mg/kg is a DOT Packing Group I and also a OSHA GHS Category. OSHA GHS Category 2 is over 5 mg/kg but less than 50 mg/kg, which is the same as DOT Packing Group II and if the material tested is over 50 mg/kg but less than 300 mg/kg, it is a DOT Packing Group III and an OSHA GHS Category 3. |
||||||||||||||||
|
DOT HMR AND OSHA GHS |
||||||||||||||||
|
Health Hazards and Categories: |
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Criteria for classifying chemicals have been developed for the following physical hazard classes |
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Criteria for classifying chemicals have been developed for the following health hazard classes: Health Hazards Only (1910.1200 APPENDIX A) |
||||||||||||||||
*NO CORRESPONDING DOT HAZARD CLASS |
||||||||||||||||
|
If you match your DOT Hazard Class definitions and their packing group assignments in 49 CFR 173.2 to the OSHA GHS Worker Protection physical & health hazards and categories in Appendix A and B of 29 CFR 1910.1200, you will have very little trouble figuring out the GHS hazard classifications which determine the most critical parts of the GHS. Once you know which GHS Hazard Classes and the Hazard Categories your material meets you can complete the container labels using Appendix C. Then use the same information in Section 1 and 2 on the SDS using Appendix D. Then you should be able to extract the information in that is required in Section 3 through 16 off your old MSDSs. Simply arrange the information in the sequence required in Appendix D to 1910.1200. |
||||||||||||||||
|
SOME OF THESE THINGS ARE NOT THE SAME |
||||||||||||||||
|
The three big differences are DOT will still lets you still use the word Poison instead of Toxic domestically on the shipping paper, whereas the OSHA GHS requires the use of Toxic on the SDS. DOT does not have a Packing Group IV so Category 4 should not meet a DOT definition and would not be transported as a hazardous material unless it was a hazardous waste, hazardous substance, marine pollutant, an elevated temperature material or a bulk container of combustible liquid. Finally, the majority of health hazards in OSHA GHS in 1910.1200 Appendix A, do not have corresponding hazard classes in the DOT 49 CFR 173.2 only the Acute toxicity hazard and Corrosion on skin. |
||||||||||||||||
|
I hope this was helpful. I hope to see you in Illinois or Michigan next week, or any of our upcoming classes. Thanks for your support and readership. |
CANADA, MEXICO AND GHS
| November 2014 HAZMAT ROB |
|
| You can’t trust what you hear, remember that. I heard that Canada was not going to adopt the Global Harmonization System. I heard wrong. After over 10 years of work, the GHS was adopted by the UN in 2001. The GHS will mandate the new Hazard Communication Container Labels and the Safety Data Sheets (SDS). On August 11, 2014, Health Canada proposed regulatory amendments under the Hazardous Products Regulations that will change the WHMIS regulations by implementing the GHS. |
|
CANADA |
|
Health Canada’s GHS will require container labels with the chemical name, signal word, hazard statement, precautionary statements, and the name of the company responsible for preparing the label. The Canadian SDS will be 16 parts with its hazard identification, composition and information on ingredients, first aid measures, fire fighting measures, accidental releases, handling and storage, exposure controls and personal protection, physical and chemical properties, stability and reactivity, toxicological information, ecological information, disposal considerations and the most recent revision date. |
|
POTUS AND THE PM |
|
Back in 2011 the Canadian PM and President Obama established the Canada-US Regulatory Cooperation Council. The Canadian and US governments have been working since 2013 to implement the GHS. Health Canada has announced an administrative policy which allows a properly prepared and formatted GHS Safety Data Sheet (SDS) to be used in Canada at this time if all of the information required by the 9-section Canadian MSDS is listed on the GHS SDS. |
|
ENGLISH AND FRENCH |
|
The Canadian SDSs must be made available in English and French, must not have a preparation date exceeding 3 years, must provide the name and address of a Canadian supplier and hazardous ingredients must be disclosed according to the requirements of the Hazardous Products Act. They also may not adopt the Ecological and Marine Pollutant Classifications in the SDSs, instead implementing those requirements under other Canadian Government Ministries. |
|
MEXICO |
|
Mexico also recommended that manufacturers, distributors and importers provide the GHS Hazard Communication labels and the 16-part Safety Data Sheets back in June of 2011. They will not enforce or require the use of the GHS. Mexico has a recently amended a standard on dangerous chemicals, hazard communication and the risks to workers, allowing GHS as an alternative to the current standard. |
|
The only reason I checked into this was a customer, that we ran an In-House Seminar for in New York City recently, emailed me a question about use of the old HMIS labels, which will not currently meet the GHS requirements. If you are having trouble with your GHS compliance drop me an email. Thank you for your readership and support. |
LUCKY SEVEN
| November 2014 HAZMAT ROB |
|
| We received an email recently concerning a small container (under 1 L) of nitrogen in a service vehicle. The question was could a small container of liquid nitrogen be carried in a salesman’s car or service vehicle. I had never been asked this before and my initial thought was, not without the shipping paper and the correct DOT/UN container. |
|
173.4 SMALL QUANTITY AND 173.4a EXCEPTED QUANTITY |
|
|
|
We knew that the container was too large to consider the small quantity and excepted quantity exceptions in 173.4 and 173.4a. Excepted quantities would be very small inner containers of up to 30 mL or 30 g each in strong outer packagings with a maximum aggregate quantity of materials of up to 1 L. The small quantity exceptions are for 1 ounce of a liquid, 1 ounce of a solid or 1 g of a poison material for the inner containers, up to 29 kg in the complete outer packaging. We were sure that these sizes might just be a little too small for my customer to use. |
|
173.6 MATERIALS OF TRADE EXCEPTION |
| Our second thought was the Materials of Trade Exception in 173.6 for salesmen and service vehicles, which does have an exception for 2.2 non-flammable, non-poisonous gas in cylinders or Dewar flasks. The Dewar flask is basically a thermos. These containers consist of an inner packaging surrounded by a vacuum. We thought this would be a good exception to take for the shipment. But is it the best way to ship this material? By taking the materials of trade exception, the shipper would be excepted from having a hazardous materials shipping paper and the hazard class labels, but the containers would have to be DOT specification packaging or equivalent and the proper shipping name or a common name would also be required on each container. The driver would also need to be trained on the materials of trade exception. All in all not a bad exception, but we still felt we could do better. |
|
COLUMN 8A EXCEPTIONS |
|
|
|
There is a third possible exception, authorized in Column 8A of the HMT for the proper shipping name Nitrogen, Refrigerated Liquid Cryogenic Liquid which is a Division 2.2 non-flammable, non-poisonous compressed gas, with the UN number of UN1977 and the labeling requirements calling for a Division 2.2 non-flammable gas label on the non-bulk cylinders. That’s right, in the Column 8A Exceptions, there is an exception of 173.320 indicated. Section 173.320 Cryogenic Liquids; Exceptions does provide relief from labels, placards and specification containers, but does not provide any relief from the hazmat shipping papers, marking, emergency response and training requirements. Again, no specification containers, no hazard class labels and placards, but the shipper still has to meet the incident report requirements in Sections 171.15 and 171.16; the Hazard Communication Regulations in Part 172 – Subpart A – General Requirements; Subpart B – The Hazmat Table; Subpart C – Shipping Papers; Subpart D – Marking; Subpart G – Emergency Response Information; Subpart H – Training; Subparts A and B of 173; and 177.804 and 177.823. |
|
COLUMN 7 SPECIAL PROVISIONS |
|
After looking at the 173.4 Small Quantities,173.4a Excepted Quantities, 173.6 Materials of Trade Exceptions and Column 8A’s 173.320 Cryogenic Liquids Exceptions, we knew I/we had only one chance left. The Special Provisions in Column 7 of the 172.101 Hazardous Materials Table. Sure enough Special Provision 345 is indicated in Column 7 for Nitrogen, refrigerated liquid cryogenic liquid. Special Provision 345 states: “Nitrogen, refrigerated liquid (cryogenic liquid), UN1977” transported in open cryogenic receptacles with a maximum capacity of 1 L are not subject to the requirements of this subchapter. The receptacles must be constructed with glass double walls having the space between the walls vacuum insulated and each receptacle must be transported in an outer packaging with sufficient cushioning and absorbent materials to protect the receptacle from damage |
|
UNDER ONE LITER |
|
So Special Provision 345 would allow the shipper of the nitrogen refrigerated liquid cryogenic liquid in open cryogenic containers under 1 liter to be shipped as unregulated, out of the HMR. No shipping papers, no labels, no marks and no UN/DOT specification containers would be required if the shipper met the 345 Special Provision requirements. |
|
OVER ONE LITER |
|
What If the receptacle has a capacity of over 1 liter? That is ok, because there is a second Special Provision in Column 7 for this material, Special Provision 346. Special Provision 346 states: “Nitrogen, refrigerated liquid (cryogenic liquid), UN1977” transported in accordance with the requirements for open cryogenic receptacles in §173.320 and this special provision are not subject to any other requirements of this subchapter. The receptacle must contain no hazardous materials other than the liquid nitrogen which must be fully absorbed in a porous material in the receptacle. By taking special provision 346, and transporting in accordance with 173.320, the shipper would not be restricted to 1 liter. The shipper could use an open cryogenic receptacle but would have to ensure that the liquid nitrogen was absorbed in a porous material. Special Provisions are not always exceptions though. For example, Column 8C Bulk Packaging restricts certain intermediate bulk containers (IBCs) and Column 7 authorizes them. Column 8A could authorize a steel drum (1A1, 1A2) and in Column 7, Special Provision N25, which states “Steel single containers are not authorized,” could take it away. I find that we don’t consult the Special Provisions in Column 7 of the Hazardous Materials Table as soon and as often as we should. They are regulations and required to be met for each and every shipment of hazardous material. |
| Thank you for your leadership and support. |
Call of Duty
| November 2014 HAZMAT ROB |
|
 |
Call of Duty |
| What is considered “on duty” under the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations? Is it the time that the driver of the vehicle is in control of his vehicle or does it include all work done by the driver? I am certainly not trying to portray myself as an expert on the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations. However, I do deal with hazmat drivers and should have known the reference and the answer. So I was happy to receive this question in an email after a seminar.
I did not have a current copy of the regulations, so I called the FMCSA Hotline and was directed to the state office, which I called and was transferred to an enforcement officer’s voicemail. So, I went to the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration website and under commonly asked questions I was able to find this one: |
|
|
Question 111: Must non-transportation-related work for a motor carrier be recorded as on-duty time? |
|
|
Guidance: Yes. All work for a motor carrier, whether compensated or not, must be recorded as on-duty time. The term “work” as used in the definition of “on-duty time” in §395.2 of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) is not limited to driving or other non-transportation-related employment. |
|
|
The FMCSA definitions in 395.2 state: |
|
|
On-duty time means all time from the time a driver begins to work or is required to be in readiness to work until the time the driver is relieved from work and all responsibility for performing work. On-duty time shall include: |
|
|
|
|
So it would seem that any time the driver is doing any work from the moment he is required to be ready to work until he is relieved of any work and responsibility assigned would be included in his or her on-duty time, without regard to whether the driver were being paid or not. I don’t always know the correct answer, so when I have a question I must admit that the Government Agencies and their websites have done a great job of providing information and interpretations. One of my favorites is the DOT Website (hazmat.dot.gov) and Hotline (800-467-4922) they are always ready to help me understand and interpret the Hazardous Material Regulations. I could not write about the requirements as confidently and concisely without their help. |
|
EVERYBODY KNOWS THAT
HAZMAT ROB |
|||
 |
EVERYBODY KNOWS THAT |
||
| Recently, I had a very enjoyable in-house seminar at a leading hazardous waste service company on Long Island. One of the reasons I enjoy doing the seminars so much is because it keeps me on my toes. I cannot remember a seminar where I was asked so many really good questions. One of those many questions was on the size requirement for the proper shipping name and UN number markings on non-bulk containers. And I stated I had seen a recent Federal Register notice relating to that fact. | |||
|
YOU DON’T LEARN REGULATIONS YOU LOOK THEM UP |
|||
|
As you may already know, it was under HM-215L that the change was made in January 2013, and it is in the new Hazardous Materials, Substances and Wastes Compliance Guide in Section 172.301, if I had taken the time to look. Each person who offers a hazardous material for transportation in a non-bulk package must mark the package with the proper shipping name and the identification number shown in the 172.101 Hazardous Materials Table. The size requirement applies only for the UN number not the proper shipping name. |
|||
|
12 MM (0.47 INCHES) ID NUMBERS |
|||
|
The identification markings preceded by “UN,” “NA” or “ID,” as appropriate, must be marked in characters at least 12 millimeters or 0.47 inches high on most non-bulk packages. |
|||
|
6MM (.24 INCHES) ID NUMBERS |
|||
|
Packages having a maximum capacity of 30 liters (8 gallons) or less, 30 kilograms (66 pounds) maximum net mass, or cylinders with a water capacity of 60 liters (16 gallons) or less must be marked with characters at least 6 millimeters or 0.24 inches high. |
|||
|
BELOW 5 LITERS / 5 KILOGRAMS |
|||
|
Packages with a maximum capacity of 5 liters (1.32 gallons) or 5 kilograms (11 pounds) or less must be marked in a size appropriate for the size of the package. I am sorry I have not mentioned this change to the Hazardous Material Regulations sooner. I will say that there is a transition date until January 1, 2017. So before you order your pre-printed, hazardous material marks, labels and packagings, make sure that they are the correct sizes. I still have a few more questions to follow up on and I will include them in future posts after I get back from this week’s seminars. Thanks for your readership and support. |
|||
Rob's Blog 