As autumn overtakes us once again, FlyingTypers offers a look at what some feel is a rather obscure part of the air transport supply chain: the requirements applicable to the shipping of Dangerous Goods (or hazardous materials, as the U.S. regulatory framework 49CFR calls it), which can also be described as “changing regulatory requirements, 2016-style.”

Up First

       Internationally, the transport of Dangerous Goods is subject to the requirements of the ICAO Technical Instructions for the Safe Transport of Dangerous Goods by Air; however, in practice the “Dangerous Goods Regulations” published by the airline interest group IATA are applied by shippers, forwarders and airlines alike.
       Since 2017 is also the start of a new biennium, the changes in the upcoming 58th edition of the IATA DGR are both large-scaled and substantial. Some of these changes certainly have the potential to cause issues for those clinging to the belief that “what has been will always be,” so the sooner you familiarize yourself with the new regulations, the smoother your hazmat business will run in the new year just around the corner.
       And no, this time the focus of these substantial changes is not where you might expect them—Lithium batteries.
       This go-around for 2017 is a much more mundane and all-day commodity that might cause some issues: UN 3166, commonly known as both vehicles and engines, flammable liquid, flammable gas or fuel cell powered in Class 9.
       This UN number covers (at least until December 31, 2016) any and all vehicles or engines powered by any kind of flammable liquid, including all devices or parts commonly installed in such vehicles, engines or engine-powered equipment such as lawnmowers, chainsaws, etc.

First, The Good News

       Since both ICAO and IATA seem to have anticipated—correctly—that some stakeholders in the supply chain will struggle with the new rules, a grace period is exceptionally applied to the changed classification rules applicable to engines and machinery until March 31, 2017.
       So until slightly beyond “The Ides Of March,” shippers can elect to ship these commodities in compliance with the regulations in force this year.
       In essence, machinery, apparatus, parts of such machinery that incorporate any kind of internal combustion engine or such engine shipped by itself must be classified in accordance with the hazards present.
       In other words, where presently all machinery and engines—no matter what kind of flammable liquid fuel or gas is used to propel it—are assigned to class 9, the 2017-2018 ICAO TI and the 58th edition of the IATA DGR require that engines and machinery powered by a flammable liquid (which is, in accordance with the regulations, a liquid exhibiting a flashpoint of 60 degrees Celsius/140 degrees F or below) are assigned to Class 3 (flammable liquids).
       Flammable, gas powered engines will subsequently be assigned to division 2.1 (flammable gases).
       A ship diesel intended for use with heavy bunker fuel 8 (HFO 4 to 6) would not fall into this classification, since HFO (Heavy Fuel Oil) typically has a flashpoint in excess of 66 degrees C (about 151 degrees F) and remains assigned to class 9.
       Theoretically, since combustible liquids (FP more than 60 but not more than 93 degrees C) under 49 CFR are not subject to any further requirements when shipped in non-bulk packagings or being residually incorporated into machinery, it might be possible to ship such HFO engine as non-dangerous.
       Since such engines also often incorporate other dangerous items, it is imperative that a trained person perform a thorough investigation into whether or not an engine must be consigned as a hazardous material or not. 
       Most shippers, when confronted with the new requirements applicable in 2017, might quote Star Trek’s Commander Spock, declaring the rules “highly illogical.”
       Nothing could be further from the truth. The new requirements make perfect sense when seen in the context of the UN Model regulations (which have formally moved to their 19th edition for the upcoming 2017-2018 biennium) and the commendable work of the UN WP 15 to make the regulations—and what’s more, the underlying rules—more consistent and thus more comprehensive.

Comprehend This

       As always, understanding will require a bit of reading into the regulations and probably a bit more background explanation from the side of hazmat trainers.
       The classification of any article, gadget, device, or machinery should simply be based on the dangers exhibited by the article or machinery, unless there is clear evidence that further factors need to be taken into consideration.
       It is not a coincidence that both ICAO and IATA have called on all stakeholders to comment and provide feedback on the drafted requirements applicable to what is called “competency based training” and presumably mandated effective by 2019.
       Such clear evidence is present when it comes to the shipping of complete vehicles. While a gasoline-powered engine would have to be shipped assigned to Class 3, a complete vehicle such as a motorbike or passenger car remains assigned to Class 9. This also acknowledges the simple fact that such commodities are daily business in air transport and known to present a fairly low degree of danger—as long as the applicable regulations, present or future, have meticulously been enacted.

What's New?

       There are a number of new and amended Special Provisions, most of them detailing the new requirements applicable to the classification of engines, apparatus, machinery, and vehicles with internal combustion engines.
       For substances in division 4.1—which currently cover flammable solids and self-reactive substances—a third hazard emitter was added, the polymerizing substances.
       As for Lithium batteries both of the Lithium-metal (UN 3090) and Lithium-ion (UN 3480) variety, not much is different.
       Both remain forbidden for transport aboard passenger aircraft when transported as such (e.g. when not installed in or packed with equipment).
       This situation will prevail into the foreseeable future until protective packagings are developed that demonstrate on the UN level that the specific risks associated with shipping Lithium batteries can be thoroughly and reliably mitigated during the course of (air) transport.
       However, the conditions under which nation states may issue exemptions so that batteries as such may be transported aboard passenger aircraft have been clarified and updated for 2017.  
       An additional specimen of the Class 9 label depicting burning batteries must now be used with fully regulated Lithium batteries in Class 9, whereas the Lithium battery handling label has been replaced with, who would have guessed, a “Lithium battery mark.”
       No surprise for any U.S. hazmat professional, since this change had already been incorporated into the 49 CFR updated Nov. 1, 2015.

One Thing Clear

       It is certainly noteworthy that the vaguely-phrased exemption in the current regulations for shippers of so-called “small” lithium cells and batteries from the requirement of mandatory Dangerous Goods Training ( which requires that staff involved in shipping such “small” Lithium batteries must have “received adequate instruction on the requirements commensurate with their responsibilities”) now clearly spells out what such “adequate instruction” entails.
       Shippers making use of this exemption would certainly be well advised to update such instructions to their staff ahead of time.

Clear Language

       A fact about IATA less known is that their corporate language is British English. In line with this, IATA has redacted the regulations to reflect both consistency and advanced grammar. For example, the word “marking,” formerly commonly used throughout the regulations, has been replaced by “mark,” since a self-adhesive label with the shipper’s adress is a “mark” for our British cousins whereas the act of applying such mark to the package would be called “marking it.”
       (Insofar, IATA has certainly impressed their mark not only on the regulations applicable to the shipping of dangerous goods by air but all modes of transport by propagating the pure and unadultered Oxford Unabridged content.)
Jens

   “My message to Theresa May (Prime Minister of the United Kingdom) is that it really is well beyond time for her government to take action,” said Robert Keen, Director General of the British International Freight Association (BIFA), as news surfaced recently of an imminent decision that will favor the expansion plan for London’s Heathrow International Airport.
   “It will be long overdue good news for our 1,500 member companies who have been dismayed over the ongoing delay,” Mr. Keen declared.
   “Despite the UK’s impending departure from the EU, government ministers continue to insist that the country remains outward-looking and open for business.
   “The UK's freight forwarding community, which is the engine of Britain’s international trade, believes an announcement that the Government will move forward with the recommendations made by the Airports Commission by building more capacity at Heathrow Airport would be massive sign that we are a confident, outward-looking trading nation, still capable of taking bold decisions that have a direct positive effect on the UK economy and its international connectivity and reputation,” Robert Keen concluded.

   Don’t miss this guy . . . he means business!
   Hazmat Specialist and Manager of FAA’s New York Hazmat Office Anthony “The Stash” Affissio will appear as the October Luncheon speaker at the next meeting of the Air Cargo Association (ACA) at JFK International Airport in New York this week.
   ACA will meet at the Hilton Inn JFK just a few steps off the main runways on Thursday, October 20.
Open to all, admission costs $50 for members and $60 for everyone else.
   ACA hosts a decent airport hotel luncheon and an eye opener starting at 11:45.
   Anthony Affissio served as Cargo Service Manager for Virgin Atlantic Cargo at Newark Liberty International and before that at Lufthansa Cargo at JFK, where he began as a warehouse agent, later moving to key account sales.
   It will be a good place to be as DGR gets some new rules starting January 2017.
Geoffrey

      “Lufthansa Cargo is constantly working on being a benchmark for the industry concerning aviation security.
      “Therefore, it is crucial to stay ahead of possible threats and enforce actions before incidents occur.
      “To achieve this goal, the Lufthansa Cargo Security Department is in constant discussion with authorities and associations worldwide.
      “In terms of priorities, of upmost importance are harmonizing and defining standards for cargo screening technology worldwide.
      “On an industry-wide basis, investment should flow toward projects that are orientated to this goal.
      “My belief is that harmonizing and defining goals gets the highest necessary level, as there is still plenty of room for improvement.
      “Lufthansa Cargo supports IATA’s approach toward the implementation of ‘eCSD’ (electronic consignment security declaration).
      “The initiative aims toward a global harmonization on the transfer of security relevant data between entities that are part of the worldwide cargo network.
      “Another topic that is in progress by the customs authorities and is fully supported by Lufthansa Cargo is cargo-data transfer between EU and the U.S. (Pre-Loading Advice Cargo Information, PLACI).
      “Here in Germany we are constantly updating our security setup and implementing new technologies.
      “The nature of the threat has not changed, only heightened, during the past few years.
      “Therefore security remains a key aspect for success as a cargo airline.
       
Security & Third Party Handling

      “Lufthansa Cargo has the same high standards when it comes to security toward third parties as it has for itself.
      “To ensure that third parties implement equal security standards, different measures have been implemented by LCAG, as an integral element of our ‘Quality Assurance Management System.’
      “QAMS is comprised of cargo security manuals, auditing, and also includes on-site inspections.
      “Most recently, Lufthansa Cargo is proud to say that it launched (in addition to our mandated general measures) a ‘Security Data Management System.’
      “SDMS includes a database with details on every station/warehouse worldwide where Lufthansa Cargo handles freight.
      “The system is updated constantly to insure that every station fulfills the high security standards determined by Lufthansa Cargo.”
       
Security Conference Ahead
       
      Harald left unanswered when another of Lufthansa Cargo’s aforementioned unique and highly acclaimed one-day security conferences will take place in Germany.
      At the time of this writing, the date and location are yet to be determined
      Harald said: “The agenda is purposely kept flexible so that our gatherings are addressing major issues confronting the industry in real time.
      “[There is] no creating an agenda months in advance—we are security experts in the here and now, gathered to discuss and deconstruct security challenges for the purposes of looking for solutions to hot button issues at hand.
      “There have been seven security conferences until now.
      “The first conference was in 2006. And I am already looking forward to the next.
      “As mentioned at the top, topics are of general interest in the industry at that time.
      “The last security conference, for example, dealt with the threat for air cargo by international terrorism and Cyber Crime.
       
Priorities In Cargo Security
       
      With the giant Lufthansa Cargo center in Frankfurt and every other cargo station the carrier either operates or is associated with under the watchful eye of “One Tough Cop,” as Harald Zielinski has been described, we wonder about priorities.
      As it turns out, Harald has thought about that as well.
      “Air cargo cannot rest. When it comes to security, Lufthansa Cargo makes no compromises. Rather, we constantly anticipate new threads and countermeasures.
      “The industry needs an immediate and long range plan toward further improvement of screening technology.
      “[Such as] avoiding different security standards within the EU (since there are still differences between EU member states when it comes to implementing EU regulation concerning aviation security).
      “There needs to be worldwide harmonization of security standards (according ICAO Annex 17) in more detail, since ICAO Annex 17 is too broad to harmonize the day-to-day cargo security business.”
       
An Appeal
       
      “Nations must develop air cargo security standards and implement new laws and regulations,” Harald Zielinski said.
      “But to get things right and actually enhance aviation security, it is necessary to know how the air cargo industry works.
      “Unfortunately, authorities worldwide still have a lack of general understanding of ‘air cargo security’ (versus aviation security for passengers).
      “Therefore, I must repeat the call that it is incumbent on the air cargo industry to better define and align common security regulations,” Harald Zielinski said.
Geoffrey

Vol. 15 No. 79
Two Cool McCool
The Collaborative Approach
Fast Jacques United
Chuckles For October 12, 2016