The Crash of Flight 592 - Part III

While preparing dangerous goods for transportation, any mistake in the classification of such goods may cause mistakes in the packaging, by selecting inappropriate packaging materials or transporting in them quantities of the product which are not allowed.

Still, even assuming that the classification is correct, there could be some mistakes in the packaging.

When the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) investigated the crash of Valujet DC 9-32, which occurred on May 11, 1996, it determined that the probable cause had been the activation of chemical oxygen generators, which had not been duly prepared for transportation (for instance, safety caps or seals that prevent the involuntary activation of the devices were missing) (1).

After the accident, the relevant U.S. authorities pursued a series of measures aimed at increasing safety with respect to the types of flights allowed and the packaging to be used for transporting not only chemical oxygen generators, but also oxidizing substances, in particular, medical oxygen, which is transported frequently given its importance for the life of many people.

First, transporting new generators in passenger aircraft was forbidden, while discarded generators (either used or unused) were forbidden both in passenger and cargo aircraft. Later, transport in cargo aircraft was regulated through approvals given by the Research and Special Programs Administration (RSPA), now called Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA)(2).

In turn, in 1997 new provisions were issued in connection with the transport of cylinders containing compressed oxygen, always as a result of the accident mentioned above.

Then, in 1999, the number of cylinders which contained medical oxygen that could be transported in the cabin of passenger aircraft started to be regulated (49 CFR 175.10 (b)), as well as the maximum number of cylinders to be transported as cargo in compartments without fire suppression systems (49 CFR 175.85 (h)). As from that moment, all compressed oxygen cylinders had to be transported in external packages meeting the behavior criteria stated on special package provisions (49 CFR 172.102).

All these requirements were then reflected in IATA's Dangerous Goods Regulations through State Variation USG-15 (3).

In 2007, PHMSA introduced a new regulation related to the characteristics of packages for chemical oxygen generators, compressed oxygen and other oxidizing gases (6). The new rule provided that packages for those materials must comply with two main requirements:

• Resistance to penetration by flame equal to that of the walls of the cargo compartment, i.e., about 927 ºC during 5 minutes (5).

• Thermal resistance due to the indirect exposure to heat generated during a fire. This protection has been required so that the actuating device of a chemical oxygen generator does not activate by the heat of a fire in the deck, and to avoid or reduce any pressure increase within the cylinders, which may cause the oxygen release upon activation of the device. The estimated temperature in the deck of an aircraft during a fire fought with halon gas is 204 ºC. Oxygen generators must not be activated if they have been under that temperature for 3 hours. This period results from calculating a maximum time for a forced landing in the first possible place, considering that the airplane is flying on the Pacific Ocean southwards (6).

Several complaints were received regarding the 2007 regulations from package manufacturers, shippers and airlines. Several organizations filed appeals to put off the coming into force of this rule, based mainly on the costs and availability in the market of the external packages with those two characteristics mentioned above.

As a result of those claims, PHMSA and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) decided to control if the required packages were available in the market and to extend the implementation of the rule until October 1, 2009, on which date the new regulations on behavior of those packages became effective, though there were still some protesting voices (6).

Some of them were heard; for instance, the claim filed by the company Satair USA, which requested the modification of the weight restrictions on packages containing chemical oxygen generators: considering that the new packages entailed heavier weights because heavier packaging must be used to meet the resistance characteristics required, it was necessary to change the maximum allowed weight from 25kg gross to 25kg net in cargo aircraft (however, transport was still forbidden in passenger aircraft). This means passing from the total weight of a package to the weight only of the dangerous goods, without taking the external package into account. And actually, the new weights allowed for cargo aircraft became effective in the USA on October 1, 2009 and, in turn, were admitted by ICAO for them to be included in the next amendment of the Technical Instructions (7). As usual, this change has also been reflected in IATA's Regulations through the State Variation for the US.

As it may be observed, the new package requirements have been implemented in and for the United States. However, they have also been presented within the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) during the 2007 meeting of the Group of Experts on Dangerous Goods (8). At that time, the American delegation submitted their local amendments and advanced that they were to include a new State Variation in ICAO's Technical Instructions, so that it contained the new technical requirements for packages for chemical oxygen generators and cylinders containing that gas.

The implementation of the use of packages with the standardized characteristics of thermal resistance and resistance to penetration by flame is imminent and this will certainly be an obstacle for trade for many developing countries which are not prepared for these changes. Airlines are the first that have to comply with the new requirements, as chemical oxygen generators are usually Company Materials (COMAT).

In the last few years, air operators had to adapt to security measures in the handling of these materials: they had to start using only cargo aircraft (which usually entails less flight frequencies and higher costs); they could only send new materials and had to perform other proceedings to dispose of used or expired generators, which are dangerous waste; and now they have started to adopt the new packages required under the American regulations (6), which are more expensive and more difficult to get.

Airlines from other countries have to meet these requirements when flying to or from or through the United States. It would not be a surprise if future editions of ICAO's Technical Instructions and of IATA's Dangerous Goods Regulations provide these package requirements in general, for flights involving all other countries, not only the United States.

For many airlines, adapting to these new package requirements will certainly be extremely difficult, as it is adapting to almost all policies which are necessary to improve transportation safety. This could cause that some airlines which currently accept chemical oxygen generators start to reject them, as other operators are already doing (see The Crash of Flight 592 - Part 2).

A possible result of all these measures could be: increased transportation safety, but less possibilities of moving oxygen generators, least of all at reasonable market values, which is also important.



(1) National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), 1997. Aircraft Accident Report, In-Flight Fire and Impact with Terrain, ValuJet Airlines, Flight 592, DC-9-32, N904VJ, Everglades, Near Miami, Florida, May 11, 1996, Report No. NTSB/AAR-97/06(PB97-910406), August 1997.

(2) 61 CFR 24618 and 61 CFR 68952, US regulations issued the same year of the crash (1996).

(3) Dangerous Goods Regulations – International Air Transport Association, 51 Ed.

(4) Regulation RSPA-04-17664 (HM-224B).

(5) 14 CFR, Part 25, Part III of Appendix F, paragraphs (a) (3) and (f) (5).

(6) Docket No. PHMSA-2009-0238 (HM-224G). Federal Register, Vol. 74 No. 198. USA.

(7) 22nd MEETING OF THE DANGEROUS GOODS PANEL (DGP) (2009) - ICAO

8) DGP/22-WP/99 - QUANTITY LIMITATION FOR PACKAGES OF CHEMICAL OXYGEN GENERATORS TRANSPORTED ABOARD CARGO-ONLY AIRCRAFT


Translated by Camila Rufino, Accredited Translator

SUMMARY OF REGULATIONS ON TRANSPORT OF DANGEROUS GOODS (*)

Transport of dangerous goods is a key link in the logistics chain, as there are several transport-related technical requirements which are sometimes difficult to determine and even to apply. Under Argentine law, these requirements are listed in Annex S of Transit Law [Ley de Tránsito] No. 24449, through Decree No. 779/95, and, in particular, in the technical provisions stated in Resolution No. 195/97 of the Argentine Secretary of Transport [Secretaría de Transporte de la Nación]. Each country has its own rules in place as regards this issue.

As stated in the first lines, there are many other enforcement authorities that regulate specific technical aspects, according to the kind of risk of the goods to be transported; for instance, explosives (Argentine Registry of Fireweapons [Registro Nacional de Armas, RENAR]), radioactive materials (Nuclear Regulatory Authority [Autoridad Regulatoria Nuclear, ARN]), etc.

At the MERCOSUR level, these regulatory provisions have been included in the Agreement for the Transport of Dangerous Goods by Road. Worldwide, the United Nations Recommendations on the Transport of Dangerous Goods prepared by its Committee of Experts on the Transport of Dangerous Goods establish a technical guide containing the requirements for the safe transport of all kinds of dangerous goods. In addition, radioactive goods are governed by the “Regulations for the Safe Transport of Radioactive Materials,” published by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). All international regulations governing the transport of dangerous goods are based on these UN recommendations.

The most significant international regulations are the International Maritime Dangerous Goods (IMDG) Code, of the International Maritime Organization (IMO), which governs maritime transport of dangerous goods; the Dangerous Goods Regulations (DGR), of the International Air Transport Association (IATA); the Technical Instructions (TI), of the international Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO); and the European Agreement on Dangerous Goods by Road (ADR), of the European Union.

What does "dangerous good" mean?

Based on the criteria of dangerousness of the goods, “dangerous goods” may be defined as any article, substance or material capable of posing risks to health, safety and/or property of people, as well as the environment, when transported in commerce. In particular, Dangerous Goods are those expressly stated in the listings of transport regulations and/or complying with the criteria of some or several of the following classes of risks:

Class 1: Explosives.

Division 1.1: Articles and substances having a mass explosion hazard.

Division 1.2: Articles and substances having a projection hazard, but not a mass explosion hazard.

Division 1.3: Articles and substances having a fire hazard and either a minor blast hazard or a minor projection hazard or both, but not a mass explosion hazard.

Division 1.4: Articles and substances presenting no considerable hazard.

Division 1.5: Very insensitive substances having a mass explosion hazard.

Division 1.6: Extremely insensitive articles which do not have a mass explosion hazard.

Class 2: Gases

Division 2.1: Flammable gases

Division 2.2: Non-flammable, non-toxic gases

Division 2.3: Toxic gases

Class 3: Flammable liquids

Class 4: Flammable solids; substances liable to spontaneous combustion; substances which, in contact with water, emit flammable gases

Division 4.1: Flammable solids, self-reactive substances and solid desensitized explosives.

Division 4.2: Substances liable to spontaneous combustion.

Division 4.3: Substances which, in contact with water, emit flammable gases.

Class 5 Oxidizing substances and organic peroxides

Division 5.1: Oxidizing substances
Division 5.2 Organic peroxides.

Class 6 Toxic and infectious substances

Division 6.1 Toxic substances.

Division 6.2 Infectious substances.

Class 7 Radioactive materials

Class 8 Corrosive substances

Class 9 Miscellaneous dangerous substances and articles

Road Transport: Comparison between the ADR and Argentine Regulations

The main difference between the ADR and the Argentine law is the distribution of rules. While the European Rule includes all aspects of the processes related to the transport of dangerous goods, in Argentina, the applicable rules are scattered in different laws and Regulatory Decrees with their respective resolutions, issued by the applicable Enforcement Authority. To that regard, the most comprehensive Argentine rule regarding the technical aspects of road transport is Resolution No. 195/97 of Decree No. 779/95, regulating Transit Law No. 24449, issued by the Secretary of Transport.

However, radioactive goods and hazardous waste are also regulated by other rules and enforcement authorities. As the ADR provides a comprehensive treatment for dangerous goods, the application of those rules is preferred to the application of the Argentine rules.

Another aspect to be taken into account for the management of dangerous goods is the degree of update of the Argentine rules. Considering the constant adaptation and innovation of technologies and the daily experience with this type of goods, technical guides should evolve according to those changes and experiences.

Although the local rules of each country usually adopt the recommendations as the basis for their application, the Argentine rules have become obsolete, as they have not been reviewed to be consistent with the guidelines established in international rules. This gives rise to problems when considering packaging not mentioned in those rules or when it is necessary to dispatch goods with United Nations numbers not included in the regulation (e.g.: UN 3351, Pyrethroid pesticide, liquid, flammable, toxic.
Furthermore, the European Agreement for the Transport of Dangerous Goods by Road (ADR, 2005) has included, among other things, the Safety Adviser and regulations on informative statements of the cases involving dangerous goods. Both of them are important instruments in the Management of Dangerous Goods, which have not been included in our regulations yet.

Other very important instrument for risk management which is included in all regulations, are the Packaging Instructions specifically stated for each United Nations number. These instructions establish the types of packaging and packaging materials that may be used for each product, as well as other requirements such as marking, labelling, etc. This helps to better adapt the packaging to the product and, consequently, improves the management of the risk that the product may involve. The Argentine rules on transport of dangerous goods by road do not include the Packaging Instructions mentioned above.

There is a worldwide trend to unify both the technical criteria on classification, packaging, labelling, marking and documentation of dangerous goods, as well as the regulatory structures applicable to the different means of transport. In this context, it would be advisable to make a new revision of the provisions in force in the Mercosur in order to conform them to the international scenario.

(*) Article: "El difícil arte de la reglamentación" (The Difficult Art of Creating Regulations) prepared for the journal Enfasis Logística, published in July 2005. http://www.logistica.enfasis.com/notas/4059-el-dificil-arte-la-reglamentacion

Translated by Camila Rufino, Certified Translator

RESUMEN NORMATIVO EN EL TRANSPORTE DE MERCANCÍAS PELIGROSAS(*)

El transporte de mercancías peligrosas es un eslabón clave en la cadena logística, ya que ligado a él se encuentran una serie de requerimientos técnicos que algunas veces son difíciles de determinar y hasta de aplicar.

En el derecho argentino, estos requerimientos se encuentran tipificados en el Anexo S de la Ley de Tránsito Nº 24449, a través del Decreto 779/95 que conforma dicho Anexo, y específicamente en las disposiciones técnicas establecidas en la Resolución Nº 195/97 de la Secretaría de Transporte de la Nación. Cada país tiene su cuerpo normativo al respecto.
Como lo establecimos en las líneas iniciales, de acuerdo a la clase de riesgo de las mercancías a transportar, existen muchas otras autoridades de aplicación que reglamentan aspectos técnicos puntuales, como explosivos = RENAR (Registro Nacional de Armas), materiales radiactivos = ARN (Autoridad Regulatoria Nuclear), etc.

A nivel del MERCOSUR estas mismas disposiciones reglamentarias están recogidas en el Acuerdo para el Transporte de Mercancías Peligrosas por Carretera. Mundialmente, las Recomendaciones para el Transporte de Mercancías Peligrosas de las Naciones Unidas, elaboradas por su Comité de Expertos en el Transporte de Mercancías Peligrosas, establecen una guía técnica con requerimientos a satisfacer para realizar el transporte seguro de todas las clases de mercancías peligrosas. Para las mercancías radiactivas rigen, además, las “Regulaciones para el Transporte Seguro de Materiales Radiactivos”, publicadas por la International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Todas las reglamentaciones internacionales que regulan el transporte de mercancías peligrosas fundamentan sus disposiciones en estas recomendaciones de las Naciones Unidas.

Entre éstas se destacan el Código Marítimo Internacional de Mercancías Peligrosas (IMDG), de la International Maritime Organization (IMO); que regula el transporte marítimo de mercancías peligrosas; las Regulaciones para el Transporte de Mercancías Peligrosas (DGR) de la International Air Transport Association (IATA); las Instrucciones Técnicas (TI) de la Organización de Aviación Civil Internacional (ICAO); y el Acuerdo Europeo sobre el Transporte Internacional de Mercancías Peligrosas por Carretera (ADR), de la Unión Europea.


¿Qué es una mercancía peligrosa?


Sobre la base de los criterios de peligrosidad de las mercancías, podemos definir como “mercancías peligrosas” a los artículos, sustancias o materias capaces de poner en riesgo la salud, seguridad y/o propiedad de las personas, así como el medio ambiente, cuando son transportadas para su comercialización. Específicamente, son Mercancías Peligrosas aquéllas que se encuentran expresamente mencionadas en los listados de la reglamentación de transporte y/o que cumplen con los criterios de alguna o varias de las siguientes clases de riesgos:

Clase 1: Explosivos.
División 1.1: Artículos y sustancias que presentan un riesgo de explosión masiva.
División 1.2: Artículos y sustancias que presentan un riesgo de proyección, pero no un riesgo de explosión masiva.
División 1.3: Artículos y sustancias que presentan un riesgo de incendio y riesgo de pequeños efectos de onda explosiva y/o proyección, pero no un riesgo de explosión masiva.
División 1.4: Artículos y sustancias que no presentan ningún riesgo considerable.
División 1.5: Sustancias muy poco sensibles que presenta un riesgo de explosión masiva.
División 1.6: Artículos extremadamente insensibles que no presenta riesgo de explosión masiva.

Clase 2: Gases
División 2.1: Gases inflamables
División 2.2: Gases no inflamables y no tóxicos
División 2.3: Gases tóxicos

Clase 3: Líquidos inflamables

Clase 4: Sustancias sólidas inflamables; sustancias susceptibles de combustión espontánea; sustancias que al entrar en contacto con el agua desprenden gases inflamables
División 4.1: Sustancias sólidas inflamables, sustancias de reacción espontánea y explosivos sólidos insensibilizados.
División 4.2: Sustancias susceptibles de combustión espontánea.
División 4.3: Sustancias que al entrar en contacto con el agua emitengases inflamables.

Clase 5 Sustancias comburentes y peróxidos orgánicos
División 5.1: Sustancias comburentes.
División 5.2 Peróxidos orgánicos.

6 Sustancias tóxicas e infecciosas
6.1 Sustancias tóxicas.
6.2 Sustancias infecciosas.

7 Materiales radiactivos

8 Sustancias corrosivas

9 Sustancias y artículos peligrosos diversos



Transporte carretero: Comparación entre el ADR y la Normativa Nacional


La principal diferencia entre el ADR y la legislación nacional es la forma en que se encuentra disgregada. Mientras todos los aspectos de los procesos relacionados con el transporte de mercancías peligrosas se encuentran contenidos en la Norma europea, en el ámbito nacional las normas aplicables se encuentran atomizadas en diferentes leyes y Decretos Reglamentarios con sus respectivas resoluciones, dictadas por la Autoridad de Aplicación que corresponda. Al respecto, la norma nacional que más abarca los aspectos técnicos en el transporte carretero es la Resolución 195/97 del Decreto 779/95, reglamentario de la Ley de Tránsito 24449, emitido por la Secretaría de Transporte.

Sin embargo, las mercancías radiactivas y los residuos peligrosos son regulados, además, por otras normas y autoridades de aplicación. Al realizar un tratamiento integral de las mercancías peligrosas, la aplicación del ADR es favorecida frente a la aplicación de las normas nacionales.

Otro aspecto a tener en cuenta para la gestión de las cargas peligrosas, es el grado de actualización de las normas nacionales. La permanente adaptación e innovación de tecnologías y la experiencia diaria con este tipo de mercancías merece que las guías técnicas evolucionen acorde con esos cambios y experiencias.

Las normas nacionales en cada país, si bien suelen adoptar las recomendaciones como base de su aplicación, en Argentina han quedado obsoletas, debido a que no han sido revisadas para seguir con los lineamientos de las normas internacionales. Esto ocasiona problemas cuando se debe considerar envases que no son mencionados en ella, o cuando hay que expedir mercancías cuyos números de Naciones Unidas no se encuentran incluidos en la reglamentación (Ej.: UN 3351, Pesticida piretroide líquido, tóxico, inflamable).

Además, en el Acuerdo Europeo sobre Transporte Internacional de Mercancías Peligrosas por Carretera (ADR, 2005) se ha incorporado a la reglamentación la figura, entre otras cosas, del Consejero de Seguridad, y también sobre declaraciones informativas de los sucesos que implican mercancías peligrosas. Ambos son importantes instrumentos en la Gestión de Mercancías Peligrosas no incorporados aún en nuestra reglamentación.

Otro muy relevante instrumento de gestión de riesgos, incorporado por todas las reglamentaciones, son las Instrucciones de Embalaje específicamente indicadas para cada uno de los números de las Naciones Unidas. En éstas están determinados los tipos y materiales de embalajes posibles de usar para cada producto, y otros requisitos como marcado, etiquetado, etc. Esto permite una adecuación más precisa del embalaje al producto y, por lo tanto, un mejor manejo del riesgo que este presenta. Las normas nacionales para el transporte por carretera de mercancías peligrosas no incluyen las mencionadas Instrucciones de Embalaje.

En el ámbito mundial existe la tendencia a unificar tanto los criterios técnicos de clasificación, embalado, etiquetado, marcado y documentación de mercancías peligrosas, así como las estructuras de las reglamentaciones que aplican para los distintos modos de transporte. En este contexto, sería adecuada una nueva adaptación de las disposiciones vigentes en el Mercosur al escenario internacional.

(*) Artículo: "El difícil arte de la reglamentación" elaborado para la revista Enfrasis Logística, publicado en julio de 2005.
http://www.logistica.enfasis.com/notas/4059-el-dificil-arte-la-reglamentacion