Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods
Laws
Amendment Package No. 2
September 2013
National Transport Commission
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2
Report Prepared by:
ISBN: N/A
National Transport Commission
Report outline
Title:
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws –
Amendment Package No. 2
Type of report:
Explanation of proposed amendments to Transport of
Dangerous Goods Laws
Purpose:
For submission to the Transport and Infrastructure
Senior Officials Committee
Abstract:
An explanation of proposed amendments to the
Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws. The proposed
th
changes incorporate amendments from the 16 and
th
17 editions of UN Model Regulations and the regular
NTC maintenance process. They are expected to
remove current inconsistencies with air and sea
transportation and to improve the clarity of existing
legislative requirements.
Key milestones:
Public consultation period: 5 August 2013 –
2 September 2013
Submission to Transport and Infrastructure Senior
Officials Committee on 11 October 2013
Submission to Standing Council on Transport and
Infrastructure on 15 November 2013
Key words:
Dangerous Goods, UN Model Regulations
Contact:
National Transport Commission
L 15/ 628 Bourke Street
Melbourne VIC 3000
Ph: (03) 9236 5000
Email: [email protected]
www.ntc.gov.au
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2<iAugust 2013
i
Foreword
The National Transport Commission (NTC) is an independent statutory body established by the
National Transport Commission Act 2003. The Commission has ongoing responsibilities to develop and
maintain uniform or nationally consistent road, rail and intermodal transport reforms to improve safety,
productivity and environmental outcomes.
The transport of dangerous goods is a high risk activity involving heavy vehicles on the public road
and trains on the rail network. Since the early 1980s Australia has participated in an international
scheme that harmonises the way that the transport of dangerous goods is regulated around the
world. The lynchpin of that scheme is a document called the Recommendations on the Transport
of Dangerous Goods – Model Regulations (the UN Model Regulations). It is produced under the
auspices of the United Nations by the United Nations Subcommittee of Experts on the Transport of
Dangerous Goods (the UN sub-committee).
In 2007 the National Transport Commission (NTC) published the Australian Code for the Transport
of Dangerous Goods by Road & Rail, seventh edition (ADG7), together with a Model Law on the
Transport of Dangerous Goods by Road or Rail and a Model Subordinate Law on the Transport of
Dangerous Goods by Road or Rail. These documents, heavily based on the UN Model
Regulations, form the framework for the regulation of the transport of dangerous goods in Australia
today. Each state and territory has passed laws that mirror the Model Law and the Model
Subordinate Law. Those laws in turn adopt ADG7.
The UN sub-committee amends the UN Model Regulations every 2 years. Since 2007 2 lots of
amendments to those Regulations have occurred and come into force internationally. The primary
purpose of the Model Amendment Regulations –Transport of Dangerous Goods by Road or Rail –
Package No. 2 is to update ADG7 in the light of those 2 lots of amendments.
However, there is also an important secondary purpose behind Package No. 2. In common with all
of the other reforms developed by the NTC, the NTC conducts a process of monitoring the
operation of the transport of dangerous goods laws in Australia to ensure that they continue to
reflect the needs of stakeholders and meet community expectations. As a result of that process a
number of desirable changes have been identified. Package No. 2 is intended to implement those
changes. In general the proposed changes are intended to clarify the operation of existing rules.
A draft version of this paper and of Package No. 2 were released for public comment during the
period 6 August 2013 to 2 September 2013. A total of 16 submissions were received in response
to the release of those documents, and both documents have been amended to take account of the
comments made in the submissions. This paper describes the input received and the NTC's
responses to that input. I thank all those who made a submission.
The NTC acknowledges the advice and assistance of the Transport of Dangerous Goods
Maintenance Group in preparing Package No. 2. The Maintenance Group includes representatives
from the competent authorities from each state and territory as well as representatives from the
Commonwealth, organisations responsible for regulating dangerous goods transported by air and
sea, and emergency services.
Greg Martin PSM
Chairman
Executive summary
The Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws provide a single national set of laws to reduce the risks
of personal injury, death, property damage and environmental harm arising from the transport of
dangerous goods by road or rail. The laws consist of a Model Law, Model Subordinate Law and the
Australian Code for the Transport of Dangerous Goods by Road and Rail (ADG7). All of these
documents are heavily based on the Recommendations on the Transport of Dangerous Goods –
Model Regulations (the UN Model Regulations) produced by the United Nations Subcommittee of
Experts on the Transport of Dangerous Goods.
The Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 amends the Transport of
Dangerous Goods laws. It contains four schedules:

Schedule 1, which amends the Model Law on the Transport of Dangerous Goods by Road
or Rail to make a minor amendment to change the references to the Australian Transport
Council to its new name - the Standing Council on Transport and Infrastructure

Schedule 2, which amends the Model Subordinate Law on the Transport of Dangerous
Goods by Road or Rail in relation to such things as:



administrative determinations

the marking and labelling of goods that are only dangerous in some modes of transport

ullage requirements

the retention and location of transport documents

the towing of vehicles containing dangerous goods

the activation of emergency plans

the referral of determinations to the Competent Authorities Panel.
Schedule 3, which makes miscellaneous amendments to ADG7 in relation to such things
as:

clarifying the intent of Australian Special Provision AU02, which deals with the
transport of diesel as a load

clarifying the tank approval process

clarifying requirements concerning the transport of clinical waste, compliance plates,
the ventilation of transport units, the maintenance of load restraint devices, underslung
segregation devices, the hydrostatic pressure testing of hoses, transport
documentation and the maintenance and location of fire extinguishers

enshrining exemptions granted by the Competent Authorities Panel that should have
general permanent application.
th
th
Schedule 4, which amends ADG7 to give effect to amendments made by the 16 and 17
editions of the UN Model Regulations. These amendments deal with matters such as:

the transport of substances which are toxic by inhalation

requirements for metal hydride storage systems

fuel cell engines

use of open cryogenic receptacles

classification criteria for environmentally hazardous substances

chemicals under pressure

dangerous goods used as coolants

flexible bulk containers

salvage pressure receptacles

lithium batteries.
All of the changes made by Schedules 1, 2 and 3 of the Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws
Amendment Package No. 2 are more fully explained in this paper.
Several changes that it was initially proposed to include in the Amendment Package have not been
included. These include proposed changes in relation to the regulation of limited quantities of
dangerous goods and to Australian Special Provision AU02 concerning the classification of gas oil
and diesel oil.
A separate discussion paper on these omitted items will be released in the coming months to
further canvass data and views from stakeholders on the best approach for Australia to adopt in
relation to these items.
A draft version of this paper and of Package No. 2 was released for public consultation in early
August 2013. Submissions relating to a particular clause of Package No. 2 are described in this
paper underneath the explanation of that clause in this paper, together with a description of the
NTC's response to the submission. Issues of a more general nature raised in submissions are
described and discussed in Part 7.
Table of contents
Report outline
i
How to make a submission to the NTC
Foreword
1
Executive summary
1.
2.
3.
Introduction
5.
6.
2
1
1.1 History of dangerous goods regulation in Australia
1.2 Link with UN Model Regulations
1.3 Structure of the legislative package
1
1
1
Statement of Problem
3
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
3
3
3
4
Problem
Dangerous goods freight task
Incidents involving dangerous goods
Reasons for updating the legislative package
Objectives
5
3.1 Objective
5
3.2 Guiding principles
4.
ii
Scope
5
6
4.1 Overview
6
4.2 Omitted items
4.2.1 Limited quantities
4.2.2 Australian Special Provision AU02
4.2.3 Other omissions
4.2.4 Future steps concerning omitted items
6
6
6
7
7
International Amendments
8
5.1 Summary of UN amendments
5.2 Emergency Action Codes
8
14
Maintenance Amendments
15
6.1 Maintenance Amendments – Model Law and Model Subordinate Law
6.1.1 Update to references
6.1.2 Reference to a load of dangerous goods
6.1.3 Small consignments of packages not requiring marking
6.1.4 Updating of reference to Australian Transport Council
6.1.5 Cargo transport units
6.1.6 Other changes to definitions
6.1.7 Instruction and training – fumigated cargo transport units
6.1.8 Expansion of the scope of administrative determinations
6.1.9 Marking overpacks containing Retail Distribution Load items
6.1.10 Marking of goods that are only dangerous in some modes
6.1.11 Loader to comply with ADG Code Chapter 7.1 provisions
6.1.12 Ullage requirements to also apply to other goods
6.1.13 Location of Transport Documents
6.1.14 Retention of Documents – Prime contractor’s duties
6.1.15 Towing broken down or immobilised vehicle
6.1.16 Activation of emergency plans
6.1.17 Reference of determinations to Competent Authorities Panel (CAP)
15
15
15
16
17
17
18
18
18
20
20
21
22
25
26
27
28
29
6.1.18 Exception to licensing of vehicles
6.1.19 Clarification of insurance requirements
6.2 Maintenance Amendments – ADG7
6.2.1 Labelling and Marking – Consistency with GHS and other standards
6.2.2 Change to term used for transport units
6.2.3 Goods too dangerous to be transported
6.2.4 Definition of Tanks
6.2.5 Interpretation of references to GHS
6.2.6 Updating of Australian Standard references
6.2.7 Dangerous Goods List
6.2.8 Phase-out of Australian names
6.2.9 Australian special provisions – AU03 Transport of unodourised LPG
6.2.10 P62A Clinical Waste – mobile garbage bins
6.2.11 Guidelines for underslung segregation devices
6.2.12 Marking of overpacks containing LQs
6.2.13 Omission of transitional provision concerning orientation arrows
6.2.14 Marking of inner packages
6.2.15 Labelling provisions
6.2.16 Change to GHS references
6.2.17 Reduction in labelling size on certain batteries
6.2.18 Placard load – minimum quantities
6.2.19 Environmental Hazardous Substance mark on Emergency Information
Panels (EIPs)
6.2.20Placarding freight containers and intermodal loads
6.2.21 Vehicle placarding examples
6.2.22 Test periods for Multiple Element Gas Containers (MEGCs)
6.2.23 Approval of tank vehicles
6.2.24 Compliance plates
6.2.25 Correction of incorrect reference
6.2.26 Ventilation
6.2.27 Correction of error – 7.1.5.1
6.2.28 Condition of restraint devices
6.2.29 Segregation of certain explosives – 1.4S
6.2.30 Separation of dangerous goods on rail vehicles
6.2.31 Hydrostatic pressure testing of hoses
6.2.32 Transfer of bitumen
6.2.33 Ullage – requirements to also apply to other liquids
6.2.34 Ullage requirements for vacuum tankers
6.2.35 Mass fill ratio for tank vehicles > 5000L capacity
6.2.36 Correction of anomaly concerning special documentation
6.2.37 Form of road transport documentation
6.2.38 Fire extinguishers
6.2.39 Parking requirements and fatigue laws
6.2.40 Parking exemptions
30
31
33
34
37
37
37
38
38
38
39
40
42
43
46
46
46
46
46
46
47
7.
Consultation
60
8.
Implementation
65
9.
References
67
47
47
48
49
50
50
51
51
52
52
53
53
54
54
54
55
55
55
55
55
58
58
List of tables
Table 1.
Summary of UN Model Regulation Amendments
9
1. Introduction
1.1 History of dangerous goods regulation in Australia
Dangerous goods, due to their physical, chemical and toxicological properties, can present an
acute risk to life, health, property and the environment, especially when being transported. It is
estimated that dangerous goods comprise 8 per cent1 of total freight transported by road and rail in
Australia. However, there have been very few accidents in recent years where life and health have
been negatively affected by the transport industry. This is to a large extent explained by the
transport industry having embraced the various editions of the Australian Code for the Transport of
Dangerous Goods that have been published since 1980.
Those editions have been based on Model Regulations published by the United Nations.
1.2 Link with UN Model Regulations
The United Nations (UN) Subcommittee of Experts on the Transport of Dangerous Goods (the UN
subcommittee) is responsible for the UN Recommendations on the Transport of Dangerous Goods
– Model Regulations (the UN Model Regulations).
The UN Model Regulations are internationally accepted as the principal technical standards
underpinning the transport of dangerous goods. The International Maritime Dangerous Goods
(IMDG) Code, the International Air Transport Association (IATA) Dangerous Goods Regulations,
the International Civil Aviation Organisation’s (ICAO) Dangerous Goods Instructions, European
Agreements concerning the International Carriage of Dangerous Goods by Road (ADR), European
regulations covering the International Carriage of Dangerous Goods by Rail (RID), and the US
dangerous goods regulatory regime are all based on the UN Model Regulations.
The UN Model Regulations are revised every two years. Australia is represented on the UN
subcommittee responsible for revising the Regulations by the Department of Infrastructure and
Transport (Cwlth).
The current edition of the Australian Code for the Transport of Dangerous Goods (ADG7) is based
th
on the 15 edition of the UN Model Regulations. Its structure largely reflects the UN Model
Regulations, with the ADG7 clauses aligning with those in the Model Regulations. It should be
noted, however, that ADG7 does not include the regulation of explosives (Class 1 Dangerous
Goods) or radioactive materials (Class 7 Dangerous Goods).
1.3 Structure of the legislative package
ADG7 is given legislative effect in Australia's states and territories through laws based on model
national laws published by the National Transport Commission. The current national model laws
are:
 the Model Law on the Transport of Dangerous Goods by Road or Rail
 the Model Subordinate Law on the Transport of Dangerous Goods by Road or Rail.
Those model laws, together with ADG7, form the transport of dangerous goods legislative package.
The Model Law provides the enforcement framework for the package, and authorises the making of
the Model Subordinate Law. The Model Subordinate Law applies ADG7 as law, and creates
numerous offences that require compliance with ADG7.
ADG7 provides detailed technical specifications, requirements and recommendations applicable to
the transport of dangerous goods by road and rail, including requirements concerning classification,
packaging, marking and labelling, and documentation.
1
Australian Bureau of Statistics 2001
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September. 2013
1
It is proposed to amend the legislative package by means of the Model Amendment Regulations –
Transport of Dangerous Goods by Road or Rail – Package No. 2.
Package No. 2 contains four schedules:
 Schedule 1, which amends the Model Law on the Transport of Dangerous Goods by Road
or Rail
 Schedule 2, which amends the Model Subordinate Law on the Transport of Dangerous
Goods by Road or Rail
 Schedules 3 and 4, which amend ADG7. Schedule 3 contains miscellaneous amendments
that arose from the ADG7 maintenance process. Schedule 4 contains the amendments
th
th
that give effect to the amendments made by the 16 and 17 editions of the UN Model
Regulations.
As it is often difficult to see from the amendments themselves what changes they are effecting, a
revised version of ADG7 has been prepared that shows the amendments (in red) as they will
appear in ADG7 once they have been approved. This enables each amendment to be seen in a
context that shows how ADG7 will change. This version of ADG7 is available on the NTC website
(www.ntc.gov.au).
It should also be noted that none of the proposed amendments will change ADG7 in any
fundamental way. Therefore, in keeping with Australian drafting practice, ADG7 will remain as
ADG7 even after the amendments have been made to it. In variance to the method used in relation
to the UN Model Regulations, the amendments will not turn ADG7 into ADG8. Australian drafting
practice only recognises a change of edition if there has been a root and branch review of the
previous edition. This also means that the changes made to ADG7 by the Package No. 2
amendments will not affect any exemptions that have an expiry that is tied to ADG7 being
superseded by another edition.
2
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September 2013
2. Statement of problem
2.1 Problem
While the number of accidents involving the transport of dangerous goods is relatively small (0.06%
of the annual road toll2), accidents involving dangerous goods can have more significant
consequences than general transport accidents. This includes greater potential to result in
significant loss of life, injuries and damage to property and the environment.
Road incidents involving dangerous goods are usually caused by factors common to all road
accidents, for example driver error, or road or weather conditions, and are rarely directly
attributable to the release or exposure of dangerous goods themselves. Although rail incidents are
less frequent, they also are rarely directly attributable to the release or exposure of dangerous
goods themselves. Therefore, the focus of dangerous goods transportation regulation is primarily
on where and how these goods can be transported and ensuring that in the case of an incident
they can be readily identified, contained and managed.
2.2 Dangerous goods freight task
Based on data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics 3, the Australian dangerous goods freight
task would appear to be approximately 8 per cent of the total road freight task, although NSW
figures indicate that a larger proportion of the road freight task in that state is dangerous goods (10
to 15 per cent)4.
Statistics indicate that the most frequently transported dangerous goods in Australia are petroleum
and petroleum products, which account for approximately 75 per cent of the dangerous goods
freight task5. Petroleum products include liquefied petroleum gas (propane and butane), petrol, jet
fuel, bitumen and chemical feedstock. The remainder of the dangerous goods freight task consists
of bulk chemicals and packaged goods, including those for household use.
Bulk tankers, articulated trucks (including road tankers), and B-Double road vehicles are typically
used to transport dangerous goods in bulk, with rigid trucks being primarily used to transport
packaged dangerous goods.
On the whole, rail proves to be a safer mode of transport than road, although far greater quantities
of dangerous goods can be transported by rail, which inherently has a higher safety risk. While the
Plastic and Chemical Industry Association (PACIA) no longer records the transport mode in respect
of transport incidents in its Health and Safety Report, there had been no fatalities involving the
transport of dangerous goods to 20026. From PACIA reports, it would appear that the average four
incidents per annum associated with rail transport of dangerous goods mainly relates to the
unintended or accidental release or spill of the goods.
2.3 Incidents involving dangerous goods
Based on information provided by the Australasian Fire and Emergency Service Authorities Council
(AFAC)7 and overseas data8, vehicles carrying flammable/combustible liquids are the most likely to
be involved in incidents or accidents involving dangerous goods. In most cases, dangerous goods
road transport incidents are usually related to a release or a spill of the dangerous goods being
transported.
BITRE 2013, PACIA 2006
Australia Bureau of Statistics 2001
4 National Transport Commission 2006
5 Australian Bureau of Statistics 2001
6 PACIA 2002
7 National Transport Commission 2006
8 Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration 2005
2
3
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September. 2013
3
2.4 Reasons for updating the legislative package
th
ADG7 was published in 2007 and was designed to align with the 15 edition of the UN Model
th
Regulations. However, the UN Model Regulations are now in their 17 edition. Both the air and sea
codes that are based on the UN Model Regulations have adopted most of the changes made by
that edition.
In addition, six years have elapsed since the current Model Law and ADG7 were introduced.
During this period of operation, Competent Authorities have identified a number of issues regarding
the clarity and enforceability of the legislative package that supports ADG7. These issues need to
be considered as part of the ongoing maintenance process to ensure that the legislative package
maintains its currency and that national regulatory uniformity or consistency is not compromised.
4
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September 2013
3. Objectives
3.1 Objective
As stated in the UN Model Regulations, the overarching objective of regulating the transportation of
dangerous goods is to prevent or mitigate, as far as possible, incidents that could endanger public
safety or harm the environment. At the same time, regulations should be framed so that they do not
hamper the movement of dangerous goods, other than those too dangerous to be accepted for
transport. The aim of regulations, therefore, is to make the transport of dangerous goods feasible
and safe by reducing the risks associated with the transport to a minimum.
With many dangerous goods within Australia being imported/exported, or transported by air and
sea, it is also important to minimise inconsistencies, nationally, internationally and across the
different transport modes. Therefore, alignment with the international regulations for the transport
of dangerous goods is also one of the primary objectives of Australian dangerous goods laws. This
is in line with the approach endorsed by the Coalition of Australian Governments9 (COAG), which
states:
Wherever possible, regulatory measures or standards should be compatible with relevant
international or internationally accepted standards or practices in order to minimise the
impediments to trade.
In some instances, the regulatory approach to transporting dangerous goods may need to be
modified to take into account specific Australian circumstances.
3.2 Guiding principles
A number of guiding principles were used in the development of ADG7. The following principles are
still considered relevant in updating ADG7:
 The UN Model Regulations should be used as the primary reference document for the
update of ADG7, and should be adopted unless there is a compelling reason not to do so.
 Existing safety provisions should be retained if there is no equivalent UN requirement.
 Existing Australian requirements should also be retained if there is conflict with a UN
requirement, and there are no significant inter-modal implications.
 The adoption of the UN model regulations should be done in a consistent, practical, and
user-friendly manner, and “Australianisms” should be retained where necessary to provide
clarification.
9
COAG 2007
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September. 2013
5
4. Scope
4.1 Overview
It is proposed to make three different types of amendments to ADG7. They are:
th
th
(1) Amendments to align with international requirements arising from the 16 and 17 editions
of the UN Model Regulations and the HAZCHEM Emergency Action Codes.
(2) Amendments from the NTC maintenance process.
(3) National exemptions currently in place that are suitable for inclusion in the ADG Code.
This report considers each of these amendment types separately. However, all of these
amendments will need to be made for the benefits of Package No. 2 to be fully realised. These
benefits derive from removing the current inconsistencies between the different transport modes
and international practices.
Many of the UN amendments are associated with packaged dangerous goods. As a significant
number of the companies that sell consumables containing dangerous goods in the Australian
market are multinational companies operating in many countries, and/or importers of these goods,
removing inconsistencies and additional regulatory requirements alleviates the regulatory cost
burden for industry and improves Australia’s competitiveness in the global market.
The remaining amendments are largely corrections, technical updates and clarifications of existing
legislative requirements. They do not represent significant policy changes and as such are not
expected to have significant cost implications for industry or government.
4.2 Omitted items
4.2.1 Limited quantities
th
The 17 edition of the UN Model Regulations inserts a new Chapter 3.4 to replace the previous
Chapter 3.4. This Chapter deals with the regulation of limited quantities of dangerous goods. In the
preliminary consultation that the National Transport Commission (NTC) undertook in relation to the
Package No. 2 amendments, it became clear that there are a wide variety of views as to whether
th
any or all of the changes made to Chapter 3.4 in the 17 edition should apply in Australia.
Stakeholder feedback has identified that the changes may have significant safety implications, and
could result in significant cost savings. These two latter factors suggest that it is desirable that a
regulatory impact analysis of the proposed changes occur before any changes are made.
In order to conduct a regulatory impact analysis the NTC will need to obtain more detailed
information concerning incidents involving limited quantities, or about any avoidable costs in
complying with limited quantities requirements. This information will be canvassed through a
separate discussion paper where key organisations will be invited to provide more detailed data to
inform the analysis.
th
It should be noted that the 16 edition of the UN Model Regulations also made some amendments
in relation to Chapter 3.4. Those amendments, which primarily relate to new marking and labelling
requirements, have been included in Package No. 2 because there seems to be widespread
acceptance by stakeholders of the proposed changes, and the changes do not have any significant
safety or cost implications. However, proposed new 3.4.10 has not been included, as this would
remove documentation requirements for limited quantities transported by land, which is one of the
UN17 issues that requires further analysis.
4.2.2 Australian Special Provision AU02
Preliminary drafts of the Package No. 2 amendments included proposed amendments to Australian
Special Provision AU02. The amendments were intended to modify AU02 to make it clear that its
purpose was to exclude the goods that it applied to, such as gas oil and diesel oil, from
categorisation as Class 3 dangerous goods only – it was not the purpose of AU02 to exclude goods
from categorisation as any other Class of dangerous goods.
6
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September 2013
Although the clarification of this purpose was intended to restore AU02 to its originally intended
meaning (as advised to the NTC by those who were responsible for the inclusion of AU02 in
ADG7), unfortunately there was nothing in the regulatory impact statement that supported the
introduction of AU02 to make clear what the original intention was, and therefore an absence of
analysis of what would have occurred had AU02 been implemented in accordance with its original
purpose.
It became clear in the preliminary consultation for Amendment Package No.2 conducted by the
NTC that giving effect to AU02 in the way that was originally intended could involve significant
costs to some sectors of industry. Again, it was felt that a regulatory impact analysis of the
proposed changes should occur before any change was made. The NTC will develop and release
a discussion paper with further information on this issue to key stakeholders requesting more
detailed information on the consequences of the proposed changes, including possible increases in
safety benefits. This will allow further analysis and the preparation of a regulatory impact
statement, with a view to including the proposed changes in Amendment Package No. 3.
4.2.3 Other omissions
Preliminary drafts of the Package No. 2 amendments also included three other proposed
amendments that are no longer in the Package. These amendments relate to:
•
the definition of consignor in the Model Law
•
the definition of aggregate quantity in the Model Subordinate Law
•
a clarification concerning the transport of nominally empty Intermediate Bulk Containers.
In each case, preliminary feedback was received indicating that a number of stakeholders believed
that the proposed changes would involve costs that should be subject to regulatory impact analysis
before any change was made. In each case the NTC lacked sufficient information to enable such
an analysis to be conducted, and therefore anyone who has information in relation to the likely
costs or benefits of the proposed amendments is invited to provide the information to the NTC.
4.2.4 Future steps concerning omitted items
It is proposed to proceed with the development of a Package No. 3 of amendments to the transport
of dangerous goods legislative package in 2014, with the intention of obtaining the approval of
Ministers in November 2014. The primary purpose of Package No. 3 will be to implement
th
amendments made by the 18 edition of the UN Model Regulations, but it is also proposed to make
further miscellaneous amendments to the legislative package. Subject to obtaining sufficient
information for the purpose of analysing the impacts in detail for each of the omitted items referred
to in this section, it is proposed to submit each of those items to regulatory impact analysis, and if
then appropriate, to include each item in Package No. 3.
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September. 2013
7
5. International amendments
5.1 Summary of UN amendments
th
As previously mentioned, ADG7 is based on the 15 edition of the UN Model Regulations. The UN
th
Model Regulations are now in their 17 edition, and it is proposed to incorporate most of the
th
th
amendments made by the 16 and 17 editions. This is in line with the principle that the UN Model
Regulations should be adopted unless there is a compelling reason not to do so.
The UN amendments include the following:
 transport of substances which are toxic by inhalation
 requirements for metal hydride storage systems
 fuel cell engines
 use of open cryogenic receptacles
 limited quantities
 classification criteria for environmentally hazardous substances
 chemicals under pressure
 dangerous goods used as coolants
 flexible bulk containers
 salvage pressure receptacles
 lithium batteries.
The amendments are set out in greater detail in Table 1, and are accompanied by a brief
description of their potential impacts for industry and regulators. The majority of these amendments
are corrections, legal clarifications and updates to the technical standards underpinning ADG7.
They do not represent significant policy changes. It is expected that the cost implications of these
changes will be minor, and will be outweighed by the cost savings associated with the elimination
of inconsistencies between the different transport modes. This has generally been supported by
industry and regulators in preliminary consultations held during the development of Package No. 2.
The NTC invites further feedback on impacts that have not been identified in Table 1.
A complete list of the UN amendments can be found in the draft Transport of Dangerous Goods
Laws Amendment Package No. 2.These amendments are also identified in red text in the draft
consolidated version of ADG7 that can be downloaded from the NTC website (www.ntc.gov.au). It
should be noted that the UN amendments relating to reserved provisions listed in ADG7 have not
been included. “Reserved provisions” are UN clauses that currently are not considered relevant to
Australia. They have been marked as reserved to ensure continuing alignment between the clause
numbering in ADG7 and the UN Model Regulations.
8
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September 2013
Table 1. Summary of UN Model Regulation amendments
Clause
Brief description
Potential impacts
1.2.1.1
Definition of Repaired Intermediate
Bulk Container
Industry
Replaces “manufacturer’s specification”
with “design type from the same
manufacturer”
Will restrict industry use of replacement
bladders from different manufacturers
May impact viability of some bladder
suppliers
Competent Authority
Simplifies inspection and prosecution
1.2.1.1
Definition of salvage pressure
receptacle
This is a new concept introduced in the
UN Model Regulations
Industry
The introduction of this concept may
require gas transporters and Western
Australia’s approved emergency
responders to carry additional types of
recovery vessels
Competent Authority
Additional requirement to be enforced
1.1.1.8
Transport of DG used as a coolant
Industry
Clarifies that these are only subject to
clause 5.5.3 of the Code
Negligible. Removes possible
misunderstandings
Competent Authority
Training
2.3.3
Determination of flash point
Changes in Flashpoint Standards
2.9.2.1
Classification of Class 9
Clarification of the subcategories of
Class 9 substances
2.9.4
Lithium batteries
Additional requirements to be met
before these batteries can be
transported by road or rail. These are in
line with air and sea transportation
requirements
Chapter 3.2
Dangerous Goods List
There are new entries for Cal Hypo (UN
3485, 3486, 3487) plus additional
dangerous goods added to the list
None, as Australian Standard 2106 series
has been retained
No real change in practice. Clarification
only
The majority of these items are
transported by air at some point in the
supply chain. Therefore, these
requirements are already being met by
industry
Impact will depend on the formulations
imported and sold
Chapter 3.4
Requirements for Limited Quantities
See separate discussion
4.1.1.20
Salvage pressure receptacles
(UN 4.1.1.19)
New concept of salvage pressure
This will require gas industry and Western
Australia’s approved emergency
responders to obtain and maintain stocks
of these for use with leaking pressure
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September. 2013
9
Clause
4.1.4.1
Brief description
Potential impacts
receptacles
receptacles
Packing Instruction P207
Industry
This new instruction for aerosols
exempts (by leaving out compliance with
4.1.1.3) rigid packs up to 55kg from any
performance tests
This would be a cost saving to the aerosol
industry
Competent Authority
Virtually eliminates need to approve
aerosol packagings
Chapter 4.3 /
Use of bulk containers
Section 6.8.5
Introduction of Flexible Bulk Containers
(BK3)
5.2.1.1
Size of markings on packagings
This will require an increase in the size
of UN No. marking on most labels
between 5kg(L) and 25kg(L) and from
30kg(L) upwards
5.5.3
Asphyxiants used for cooling
Until now there have been no specified
requirements for packages and cargo
transport units which are cooled with
CO2 etc.
6.1.2.7
Also 6.1.4.14
Codes for designating types of
packagings
Additional flexibility. No significant cost
implications
Will have some cost implications.
However, industries that transport goods
by air and sea would already be compliant
with these marking requirements
This may have cost implications for the
food industry and its transporters that may
not previously have been brought under
dangerous goods transportation
requirements
Clarification only
No cost implications
Addition of material “N” for boxes of
other metals adds other packaging
options
6.1.3.1(a)
Marking
Clarification only
6.2.2.7.2
Clarification of how the UN packaging
symbol can be used
No cost implications
General requirement
This requirement is considered too
general to have any cost impact
6.3.4.2
6.5.2.1.1
6.6.3.1(a)
6.1.4.0
Any permeation of the substance
contained in the packaging must not
constitute a danger under normal
conditions of transport
6.1.5.3.6.3
Revised criteria for passing drop test
Inners must remain completely within
the outer packaging
6.2
Periodic Inspection and test
New requirement for inspecting and
10
Clarification only. According to Competent
Authorities this is an implicit requirement
in the current testing process, therefore
having no cost implications
Costs cannot be determined as this is a
general statement only. The UN is
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September 2013
Clause
6.2.1
6.2.1.1.5
Brief description
Potential impacts
testing pressure relief valves on
cryogenic receptacles
expected to fill it out in future editions
Note
Clarification only
Aerosol dispensers etc. not subject to
the requirements of 6.2.1 to 6.2.3
No cost implications
Test pressure
No impact as AS 2030 has to be
reinstated here in line with the
Introductory Note and Packing Instruction
P200. Australian cylinders use pressure
relief (as do UK, USA and Canada) which
means they cannot meet the UN/ISO
pressure requirements. This is permitted
by UN.
Additional requirements for test
pressures of pressure vessels
6.2.1.3.4
Service equipment
No cost implications
Reference to additional packing
instruction
6.2.1.5.1
Inspection and test
6.2.1.5.3
Makes allowance for metal hydride
storage systems
6.2.2.1.5
No cost implications
6.2.2.2
6.2.2.9.1
6.2.1.6.1
6.2.2.1.1
6.2.2.3
6.2.2.4
6.2.2.7.9
Periodic Inspection and test
Clarification only
Additional notes
No cost implications
Inspection and test and service
equipment
No cost implications
Additional ISO cylinder Standards
Marking refillable UN pressure
receptacles
Removes uncertainties
Clarification of marking of bundles
6.2.3.3
Requirements for non-UN pressure
receptacles
Added receptacle types
6.2.3.5
Salvage pressure receptacles
New entries for salvage pressure
receptacles
6.2.4.3
Alternative testing methods
No cost implications provided it is
recognised that the cylinders in Australian
bundles defer to AS 2030
This is a new concept. Impact on industry
is unknown as salvage pressure
receptacles have not been used here
previously. These requirements have only
come into effect in the UN Model
Regulations from 1 January 2013. An
equivalent transition period will be
incorporated in the ADG.
Competent Authority
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September. 2013
11
Clause
6.3.5.4
Brief description
Potential impacts
Alternative testing for some aerosols
This requires the competent authority to
approve alternatives
Puncture test
No cost implications. Illustration only
Addition of figure
6.5.2.2.2
Additional marking
No cost implications. Illustration only
Dimensions added to illustrations
6.5.2.2.4
Additional marking
Negligible – only applies to new IBCs
Additional Intermediate Bulk Container
(IBC) marking
6.5.2.4
Additional marking
Industry
Clarification of marking requirements for
remanufactured IBCs
Minor for IBC remanufacturers
Competent Authority
Facilitates tracing remanufacture of IBCs,
particularly if involved in incidents
6.5.4.1
Package testing
Industry
6.6.1.2
Quality assurance programs required for
remanufactured and repaired IBCs and
large packagings
Costs will depend on what systems
industry already have in place
Competent Authority
Additional requirement to be enforced
6.6.3.1
Primary marking
Minimum size marking for large
packagings
6.6.3.3
Primary marking
Additional marking for large packagings
6.6.5.2.2
Preparation for testing
Marginal cost implications if any. There
will also be a 2-year transition period
allowed for this amendment. Industries
that transport dangerous goods via air
and sea are to be compliant with this
requirement from 1 January 2014
Marginal cost implications, if any. There
will also be a 3-year transition period
allowed for this amendment. Industries
that transport dangerous goods via air
and sea are to be compliant with this
requirement from 1 January 2015.
Clarification/restatement only
Water may be used under conditions in
6.6.5.3.4.4
6.6.5.3.4.4
Drop heights
Consistency
Amended height requirements to be
consistent with all other drop test
requirements in 6.1.5
6.7.2.6.2
Valve protection
Negligible
Includes requirement for external stopvalve
12
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September 2013
Clause
Brief description
Potential impacts
6.7.2.8.4,
6.7.2.10.1
Pressure-relief devices
Increased flexibility
6.7.2.13.1
Marking of pressure-relief devices
Fusible elements allowed
Minor cost implications
Additional tank marking
6.7.2.13.2
Marking of pressure-relief devices
Updated standards
6.7.2.20
Marking of portable tanks
Unknown impact, however the general
principle is to align with the latest version
of ISO Standards
Minor cost implications
Updated tank compliance plate marking
6.7.3
Note
Extends usage
Inclusion of the transport of chemicals
under pressure
6.7.2.20.2
Portable tank marking
Industry
Marking with portable tank instruction
One-off cost for tank owner
Facilitates checking by user
Competent Authority
Facilitates checking
Other
changes in:
6.7.3, 6.7.4
Similar to those in 6.7.2 for marking of
pressure-relief devices and portable
tanks
Minor implications
Pressure-relief devices
Negligible cost implications
6.7.5
6.7.5.4.1
MEGC for other gases to be fitted with
pressure relief devices if required by
competent authority
6.8
Definitions of bulk containers
Increased flexibility
Addition of BK3 bulk containers
Chapter 7
Transport provisions
No impact – explanatory only
Inclusion of Introductory Note
Chapter 7 and
Chapter 8
Minor amendments to notes and
addition of BK3 bulk containers
No cost implications
11.1.2.2.1
Dangerous goods description
Removes uncertainty
Inclusion of clarification note
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September. 2013
13
5.2 Emergency Action Codes
Appendix C in ADG7 provides additional information that may be useful in the event of an
emergency. This includes the HAZCHEM Codes, as listed in the Dangerous Goods Emergency
Action Code (EAC) List published by HM Fire Service Inspectorate of the United Kingdom. When
dangerous goods are transported in portable tanks, demountable tanks, multiple element gas
containers, bulk containers or tank vehicles, it is a requirement of Chapter 5.3 of ADG7 that the
Hazchem Code be displayed on the emergency information panel.
The current list in ADG7 is based on the 2005 UK EAC list. ADG7 has been amended to align with
the 2013 version. Additionally, based on discussions with the Australasian Fire and Emergency
Service Authorities Council (AFAC), it is proposed make the following amendments to the
instructions in Appendix C:


Under C2.3.3 an incident controller is to be allowed to make a risk-based decision
regarding the use of liquid-tight suits with full fire kit.
Under C2.7.1 for multi-loads, it is to be required that the bullet indicating polar
chemicals be retained in the EAC for mixed loads
There may be some costs associated with changing the emergency information panels. However, it
is considered necessary for emergency services to have access to the correct and most up-to-date
information to safely manage an incident in the case of an accident involving dangerous goods.
Consultation comment
AFAC raised concerns that the drafting of the amendments to notes C2.3.3 and C2.7.1 did not fully
capture the changes that it sought.
NTC response: The drafting of the amendments has been refined in the light of this feedback.
14
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September 2013
6. Maintenance amendments
Under its inter-governmental agreement, the NTC is required to monitor, review and evaluate its
reforms. Regular reform maintenance ensures that agreed reform objectives are being delivered.
Six years have lapsed since the current Model Law and ADG7 were introduced. During this period
Competent Authorities have identified a number of issues regarding the clarity and enforceability of
the legislative requirements supporting ADG7. These issues have been discussed by the Transport
of Dangerous Goods Maintenance Group, and it has been agreed that a number of amendments
should be made to the Model Subordinate Law (MSL) and to ADG7. Section 6.1 explains the
proposed amendments to the MSL, and Section 6.2 explains the proposed amendments to ADG7.
6.1 Maintenance amendments – Model Law and Model Subordinate Law
This section explains the proposed amendments to the Model Law and the Model Subordinate Law
(MSL), and includes the draft amendments. These correspond with the draft provisions in
Schedules 1 and 2 of Package No. 2). Based on preliminary consultation with industry, these
amendments are not expected to have cost implications.
6.1.1 Update to references
The Australian Transport Council is now known as the Standing Council on Transport and
Infrastructure, so the Model Act needs to be updated to reflect this change.
Draft provision
In section 118(1) of the Model Act on the Transport of Dangerous Goods by Road or
Rail 2007, for "Australian Transport Council" substitute "Standing Council on
Transport and Infrastructure".
6.1.2 Reference to a load of dangerous goods
The MSL uses the term a load of dangerous goods in a number of clauses that set out transport
requirements, including placarding, stowage and segregation. These clauses are:

1.1.6(2)

1.2.1 Definitions – placard load

5.3.1(1)

5.3.2(1)

8.1.1(1) and (2)

8.1.2(1)

8.1.3(1)

8.1.4(1)

9.1.1(1)(b)
Issue
The definition of the term load is set out in clause 1.2.13:
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September. 2013
15
Legal advice has confirmed that based on this definition the above clauses can only apply to loads
which consist only of dangerous goods. They cannot be applied to loads which contain both
dangerous goods and non-dangerous goods.
Draft provision
(1)
In clauses 1.1.6(2), 5.3.1(1), 5.3.2(1), 8.1.1(1), 8.1.1(2), 8.1.2(1), 8.1.3(1), 8.1.4(1) and
9.1.1(1)(b), for "load of dangerous goods" substitute "load that contains dangerous
goods".
(2)
In clause 1.2.1, in the definition of placard load, for "load of dangerous goods"
substitute "load that contains dangerous goods".
It is noted that the draft provision is in line with the approach taken in clause 14.2.1 of the MSL,
where the words a load of were replaced with the words a load that contains by the 2009 Model
Amendments Regulation to ensure the application of clause 14.2.1 was not restricted.
Consultation comments
It was recommended that the word "contains" be substituted with "includes", as the former implied
that the dangerous goods "are somehow constrained within something".
NTC response: We think it is clear from the context that "contains" is used in its "includes" sense
rather than its "holds within bounds" sense. As giving effect to the recommendation would also
require some consequential amendments, we have not adopted this recommendation.
6.1.3 Small consignments of packages not requiring marking
Clause 1.1.7(2)(a) of the MSL exempts small quantities of dangerous goods from complying with
the regulations where the aggregate quantity in a consignment is less than the quantity requiring
inner package marking under 5.2.1.8 of ADG7.
Issue
The marking requirements under 5.2.1.8 of ADG7 do not cover Category B Division 6.2 Infectious
substances. As a result, the current wording in clause 1.1.7(2)(a) of the MSL effectively allows any
quantity of these substances to be transported without complying with the law.
Draft provision
For clause 1.1.7(2)(a) substitute –
"(a)
that are not Division 6.2 substances and that are in a consignment where the
aggregate quantity of dangerous goods is less than the quantity for which an inner
package is required by the ADG Code to be marked with a proper shipping name or
the technical name of the substance (ADG Code 5.2.1.8); or".
16
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September 2013
6.1.4 Updating of reference to Australian Transport Council
The Australian Transport Council is now known as the Standing Council on Transport and
Infrastructure. It is desirable to update the MSL to reflect this change.
Draft provision
In clause 1.2.1 –
(1)
(a)
omit the definition of Australian Transport Council;
(b)
after the definition of service equipment insert –
"Standing Council on Transport and Infrastructure means the council of
Commonwealth, New Zealand, State, Australian Capital Territory and
Northern Territory Ministers, established on 11 June 1993 as the Australian
Transport Council and subsequently restructured as the Standing Council on
Transport and Infrastructure, but constituted so that it consists of only 1
Minister representing each of the Commonwealth, the States, the Australian
Capital Territory and the Northern Territory.".
(2)
In clause 14.2.2(1), for "Australian Transport Council" substitute "Standing Council
on Transport and Infrastructure".
6.1.5 Cargo transport units
th
Under the 17 edition of the UN Model Regulations the term “transport unit” has been updated to
“cargo transport unit”. As the term is defined in the MSL, it also needs to be amended in the MSL.
Draft provision
(1)
In clause 1.2.1 –
(a)
after the definition of capacity insert –
"cargo transport unit means –
(b)
(a)
a road transport tank, or freight, vehicle; or
(b)
a railway transport tank, or freight, wagon; or
(c)
a portable tank; or
(d)
a bulk container; or
(e)
a freight container; or
(f)
a MEGC.";
in the definition of transport, in paragraph (b), before "transport unit" (wherever
occurring) insert "cargo";
(c)
(2)
omit the definition of transport unit.
In clauses 1.2.13, 1.6.1(2)(b), 5.2.2(1), 5.3.3(3), 5.3.5(3), 5.3.6(3), 7.1.2, 7.1.3(1),
7.2.2, 8.1.1(2), 8.1.2(2), 8.1.3(2), 8.1.4(2) and 11.2.4(1), before "transport unit"
(wherever occurring) insert "cargo".
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September. 2013
17
Consultation comments
It was suggested that a reference to "a road transport tank or freight vehicle" was ambiguous, even
though it is wording taken directly from the UN Model Regulations – it was further suggested that
adding "vehicle" after "tank" would resolve the ambiguity in favour of the intended meaning.
NTC response: Agree with the concern raised, and this has been addressed by adding extra
commas. The same change has been made to the corresponding definition in ADG7.
6.1.6 Other changes to definitions
References to the International Civil Aviation Organisation Technical Instructions and the
International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code are being updated in line with changes made to the
UN Model Regulations.
Draft provision
In clause 1.2.1 –
"ICAO approved means approved in accordance with the ICAO Technical
Instructions.
ICAO Technical Instructions means the Technical Instructions for the Safe
Transport of Dangerous Goods by Air published by the International Civil Aviation
Organisation.
IMDG Code means the International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code published
by the International Maritime Organisation.
IMO approved means approved in accordance with the IMDG Code".
6.1.7 Instruction and training – fumigated cargo transport units
Special provisions relating to fumigated cargo transport units have been included in Chapter 5.5
ADG7 in accordance with the UN Amendments. Originally, this included training requirements.
However, it is considered more appropriate for training requirements to be included in the MSL with
other training requirements associated with the transport of dangerous goods.
Draft provision
After clause 1.3.1(d) insert –
"(da) handling fumigated cargo transport units;".
6.1.8 Expansion of the scope of administrative determinations
Clauses 1.6.1 and 1.6.3 of the MSL provide powers to make determinations in relation to
dangerous goods, packaging, vehicles and routes.
Clause 1.6.4 defines an administrative determination and includes a note that Part 17 contains
provisions for dealing with administrative determinations:
18
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September 2013
Issue
Part 17 sets out procedures for dealing with applications (clause 17.1.1), cancellations (clause
17.1.8) and variations (clause 17.1.9) in respect of administrative determinations. However, the
MSL is silent on non-administrative determinations that might be applied for by, and that are
applicable to, a representative of a “class of persons” such as an industry association. The MSL is
also silent on a non-administrative determination made by a Competent Authority on its own
initiative (that is, with no application being involved).
This MSL silence has ramifications including the following:

There is no power to charge a fee for an application for a determination made on behalf of
a class of persons.

There is no power to cancel or vary a determination given to a class of persons or made by
a Competent Authority on its own initiative.
Draft provision
(1)
In clause 1.6.4 –
(a)
before "A determination" insert "(1)"; and
(b)
for paragraph (b) substitute –
"(b)
applies only to the person, or to the person and to other people named
in the application.".
(2)
At the end of clause 1.6.4 insert –
"(2)
A determination is also an administrative determination if it –
(a)
is made at the initiative of the Competent Authority; and
(b)
applies to one or more people named in the determination; and
(c)
does not impose any obligation on any person, other than
conditions that apply if action is taken on the basis of the
determination.
(3)
A determination made at the initiative of the Competent Authority may be
varied at the initiative of the Competent Authority.".
(3)
After clause 17.1.9(3) insert –
"(3A)
In the case of an administrative determination that applies to more than one
person, the Competent Authority may vary the determination by removing
the name of a person who is unsuitable as described in {subclause} (3),
even if that person was the original applicant for the determination.".
Consultation comments
It was suggested that subclause (2) be broken into paragraphs to make it easier to read.
NTC response: Agree, and subclause (2) has been amended accordingly.
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September. 2013
19
6.1.9 Marking overpacks containing Retail Distribution Load items
Clause 5.2.2 defines what is appropriately marked in relation to receptacles, packages and
overpacks. For overpacks, clause 5.2.2 (3) provides they are appropriately marked if marked and
labelled in accordance with 5.1.2 of ADG7.
Issue
In addition to 5.1.2, 7.3.3 of ADG7 also allows overpacks to be marked with a mixed class label
when they form part of a Retail Distribution Load. This is in situations where the contents of the
overpack fully comply with the Retail Distribution Load characteristics outlined in 7.3.1 of ADG7.
Clause 5.2.2(3) currently does not reference overpacks marked under 7.3.3 of ADG7 as
appropriately marked.
Draft provision
For clause 5.2.2(3) substitute –
"(3)
An overpack is appropriately marked if it is marked and labelled in accordance with:
(a)
Section 5.1.2 of the ADG Code; or
(b)
if the overpack is transported only as part of a retail distribution load, Section
7.3.3 of the ADG Code."
Consultation comments
One submission noted a drafting error. It was remedied by omitting a superfluous "with" in
paragraph (b).
6.1.10 Marking of goods that are only dangerous in some modes
Under the Special Provisions of ADG7, certain substances are not subject to ADG7. For example,
AU01 – Environmentally Hazardous Substances transported in IBCs.
SP No
AU01
Environmentally Hazardous Substances meeting the descriptions of UN 3077 or UN 3082
are not subject to this Code when transported by road or rail in:
(a) packagings that do not incorporate a receptacle exceeding 500 kg(L); or
(b) IBCs.
Clause 2.1.1(2)(b) of the MSL then provides that those substances are not dangerous goods.
20
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September 2013
Issue
This has had unforeseen consequences. For example, imported substances which are dangerous
goods for marine transport (and which are labelled accordingly) may not be dangerous goods for
road or rail transport if packed in smaller receptacles.
Under the clause, it is an offence for those substances to be labelled as dangerous goods,
however it is not practical (and possibly not desirable from an OHS perspective) to remove the
labels they would be displaying on arrival after importation. The draft provisions are intended to
overcome the problems that arise from this situation.
Draft provision
(1)
After clause 5.2.3(3) insert –
"(3A)
{Subclause} (3) does not apply if the marking or labelling of the package
complies with the requirements of the ICAO Technical Instructions or the
IMDG Code with respect to the contents of the package.
(3B)
(2)
A reference to a label in this {clause} includes a reference to a placard.".
After clause 5.2.4(3) insert –
"(4)
{Subclause} (3) does not apply if the marking or labelling of the package
complies with the requirements of the ICAO Technical Instructions or the
IMDG Code with respect to the contents of the package.
(5)
(3)
A reference to a label in this {clause} includes a reference to a placard."
After clause 5.2.5(3) insert –
"(4)
{Subclause} (3) does not apply if the marking or labelling of the package
complies with the requirements of the ICAO Technical Instructions or the
IMDG Code with respect to the contents of the package.
(5)
(4)
A reference to a label in this {clause} includes a reference to a placard."
After clause 5.3.3(3) insert –
"(4)
{Subclause} (3) does not apply if the placarding of the transport unit
complies with the requirements of the ICAO Technical Instructions or the
IMDG Code with respect to the contents of the transport unit.".
(5)
After clause 5.3.4(3) insert –
"(4)
{Subclause} (3) does not apply if the placarding of the load complies with
the requirements of the ICAO Technical Instructions or the IMDG Code
with respect to the contents of the load.".
(6)
After clause 5.3.5(3) insert –
"(4)
{Subclause} (3) does not apply if the placarding of the transport unit
complies with the requirements of the ICAO Technical Instructions or the
IMDG Code with respect to the contents of the transport unit.".
6.1.11 Loader to comply with ADG Code Chapter 7.1 provisions
Clause 7.1.3(1) prohibits a person from loading certain types of dangerous goods other that in
accordance with Chapter 7.1 of ADG7.
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September. 2013
21
Issue
The wording of clause 7.1.3(1)restricts the clause to transport units which are being loaded onto a
vehicle. The clause is silent on a vehicle being directly loaded with dangerous goods, and is not
logical given that a vehicle is also included in the definition of a transport unit.
Draft provision
For clause 7.1.3(1) substitute –
"(1)
A person must not load dangerous goods to which this Division applies for transport
by road or rail in a cargo transport unit other than in accordance with Chapter 7.1 of
the ADG Code.
Offence provision.".
6.1.12 Ullage requirements to also apply to other goods
Clause 10.3 of the MSL outlines the duties on transferors, prime contractors, rail operators and
drivers in relation to bulk transfer into a tank vehicle.
Issue
Currently, the MSL is not consistent in the way it applies the ADG7 requirements. For example,
clause 10.3.2 applies only to a person transferring dangerous goods. The ullage rules in ADG7
would not apply in a situation where the person is loading a compartment with non-dangerous
goods, for example diesel.
Similarly, clause 10.3.3 only applies to dangerous goods in a tank. If there was another tank on the
vehicle, for example the rear trailer on a B-Double, which was loaded with diesel only, the ullage
rules would not apply.
For safety reasons and to ensure consistency, it is desirable that the ullage requirements apply to
other goods when a load consists of both dangerous and non-dangerous goods. Therefore, it is
proposed to amend clause 10.3.2 to apply to the transfer of both the dangerous and nondangerous goods and clauses 10.3.3 and 10.3.4 to apply to a vehicle carrying both dangerous and
non-dangerous goods.
It is also proposed to amend 10.3.1.2 of ADG7 to ensure that ullage rules apply to all liquids carried
in large compartments of a tank vehicle transporting dangerous goods.
Draft provision – MSL
(1)
After clause 10.3.2(1) insert –
"(1A)
If –
(a)
a person is engaged in the bulk transfer of goods that are not
dangerous goods to a tank; and
(b)
the tank is on, or part of, a vehicle; and
(c)
the person knows, or reasonably ought to know, that the vehicle is
carrying dangerous goods, or is likely to carry dangerous goods
before the tank is emptied –
22
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September 2013
the person must ensure that the ullage in the tank complies with section
10.3.1 of the ADG Code as if the goods were dangerous goods.
Offence provision.".
(2)
In clause 10.3.2(2), after "{subclause} (1)" insert "or (1A)".
(3)
After clause 10.3.3(1) insert –
"(1A)
If –
(a)
a prime contractor or rail operator uses a vehicle to transport a tank
containing goods that are not dangerous goods; and
(b)
at the same time uses the vehicle to also transport dangerous
goods –
the prime contractor or rail operator must ensure that the ullage in the tank
complies with section 10.3.1 of the ADG Code as if the goods were
dangerous goods.
Offence provision.".
(4)
After clause 10.3.3(2) insert –
"(3)
It is a defence to a prosecution for an offence against {subclause} (1A) that
the prime contractor or rail operator complied with that {subclause} as far as
practicable.".
(5)
In clause 10.3.3(2), after "{subclause} (1)" insert "or 1A".
(6)
In clause 10.3.4, before "A person" insert "(1)".
(7)
At the end of clause 10.3.4 insert –
"(2)
If –
(a)
a road vehicle contains in a tank goods that are not dangerous
goods; and
(b)
at the same time the vehicle contains dangerous goods –
a person must not drive the vehicle if the person knows, or reasonably
ought to know, that the ullage in the tank would not comply with section
10.3.1 of the ADG Code if the goods in it were dangerous goods.
Offence provision.".
Draft provision – ADG7
For 10.3.1.2 substitute –
"10.3.1.2 Ullage of large tank or compartment
10.3.1.2.1
This clause applies to liquids having a viscosity less than 2,680 mm2/s at
20°C, or the maximum temperature of the substance during transport in
the case of the heated substance, that are either:
(a)
dangerous goods; or
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September. 2013
23
(b)
10.3.1.2.2
liquids other than dangerous goods that are transported in the
same tank, or in another tank on the same vehicle or combination
vehicle, as dangerous goods.
Any liquid described in 10.3.1.2.1, must not be transported in a large
compartment tank as defined in AS 2809.1, if the ullage in the large
compartment is more than 20% but less than 85%.
NOTE 1:
10.3.1.2.2 applies only to those tanks or compartments of a road tank
vehicle that individually exceed 8,600 L. It does not apply to portable
tanks, or to smaller tanks or compartments on the same vehicle.
NOTE 2:
This ullage requirement corresponds to a restriction on the transport of a
large compartment tank having a degree of filling of more than 15% but
less than 80%.
NOTE 3:
4.2.1.9.6 applies in lieu of 10.3.1.2 to these liquids when transported in
portable tanks.
10.3.1.2.3
10.3.1.2.2 does not apply to liquefied gases, or to TARS, LIQUID (UN
1999), or to elevated temperature liquids (UN 3256 and 3257), or to waste
liquids transported in vacuum tank vehicles.".
Consultation comments
1.
Some technical concerns were raised as to the effectiveness of proposed
clause 10.3.2(1A)(b):
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
to avoid complying with this as currently worded, all the transferor would have to
do would be to load the non-DG first;
it does not impose any requirement where the DG might be subsequently loaded,
even if the person doing the transfer knows this is likely to happen; and
it does not allow for the situation where the transferor could not be expected to
know DG are, or are to be, loaded.
NTC response: Accept that there is a problem. Paragraph (b) has been amended, and a
new paragraph (c) has been added to address the concerns raised.
2.
A comment was made that clause 10.3.3(1) should not be a strict liability offence, and that
both it and proposed new clause 10.3.3(1A) should provide a defence similar to clause
10.3.2(2).
NTC response: As the first of these comments involves new policy issues it is not possible
to address it in this Package, and it will be referred to the Transport of Dangerous Goods
Maintenance Group for consideration. However, as proposed clause 10.3.3(1A) is new, is
similar to proposed new clause 10.3.2(1A), for which the defence was provided, and was
not intended to be a strict liability offence, a defence based on clause 10.3.2(2) has been
added to apply to clause 10.3.3(1A).
3.
A comment was made that the MSL should contain a provision that specifically enforces
4.2.1.9.6 of ADG7, which imposes ullage requirements in relation to ISO tank containers.
NTC response: As this comment involves a new policy issue it is not possible to address it
in this Package, and it will be referred to the Transport of Dangerous Goods Maintenance
Group for consideration.
4.
With respect to the proposed change to ADG7, a submission was made suggesting
improvements to the way 10.3.1.2 of ADG7 should be worded. The submission was made
in the form of a complete revised 10.3.1.2, and the suggested revision has been adopted in
full.
5.
Several submissions expressed concern that these provisions will impose ullage
obligations in relation to containers of non-dangerous goods.
24
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September 2013
NTC response: This concern highlights the purpose of the new provisions. Ullage
requirements are primarily intended to reduce or prevent vehicle roll-overs. Dangerous
goods laws are concerned with, among other things, preventing the roll-over of vehicles
that are transporting dangerous goods. From that point of view it is not pertinent that when
a vehicle that has a mixed load of both dangerous goods and non-dangerous goods rolls
over, the roll-over was caused by inappropriate ullage in the load of the non-dangerous
goods. The fact that it has rolled over while transporting dangerous goods is the problem.
It is therefore well within the province of transport of dangerous goods laws to require that
when non-dangerous goods are carried in the same load as dangerous goods, that the
non-dangerous goods in the load meet ullage requirements that minimise the chances of
them causing a roll-over of the vehicle in which they are being transported.
6.1.13 Location of transport documents
Transport documents play an important role in the safe transport of dangerous goods. They contain
essential information which enables an inspector to ascertain if the dangerous goods are being
transported correctly, in accordance with requirements of the ADG Code. Additionally, they contain
vital information in the event of a vehicle accident.
The requirement to carry transport documents is set out in Part 11 of the MSL. Chapter 11.1 of
ADG7 sets out requirements for the content of transport documents (11.1.2), special provisions
(11.1.3), and requirements for the locations of transport documents on a vehicle (11.1.4).
Issue
11.1.4 of ADG7 specifies where transport documents should be located, stating that transport
documentation must be carried with the emergency information in the emergency information
holder. However, Part 11 of the MSL uses the term documentation that complies with Chapter 11.1
of the ADG Code. Legal advice has indicated that this wording is not sufficiently precise and can
only relate to the form or the content of transport documentation, not how they should be carried or
where they should be located. The effect is that there is no offence committed if transport
documents are not carried in emergency information holders (EIHs) as long as they are carried
somewhere in the vehicle.
Recent enforcement campaigns have highlighted significant problems with transport documents not
being carried in the emergency information holders, including difficulty in locating them for
inspection and separating them from general consignment notes, with an increasing trend for
drivers to be given large bundled wads of transport documents and consignment notes that cannot
fit into a typical EIH. In some instances, documentation has been given to drivers in sealed
envelopes. Being unable to locate transport documents also presents safety issues in the event of
vehicle accidents.
The draft provision imposes a clear requirement for prime contractors and drivers to carry transport
documents in EIHs in the case of placard loads. This is in line with their duties in relation to
emergency information (MSL 11.2.3 and 11.2.5). Having ready access to the information contained
in transport documents is considered as important as access to emergency information in the event
of an incident, and arguably more important for compliance and enforcement purposes.
Draft provision
(1)
For clause 11.1.4(1) substitute –
“(1)
A prime contractor must ensure that a person does not drive a road vehicle
used by the prime contractor to transport dangerous goods if:
(a)
the person has not been given transport documentation that complies
with Chapter 11.1 of the ADG Code for the goods; and
(b)
the documentation is not readily able to be located in the vehicle in
accordance with Chapter 11.1 of the ADG Code.
Offence provision.".
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September. 2013
25
(2)
For clause 11.1.6(1) substitute –
"(1)
The driver of a road vehicle transporting dangerous goods –
(a)
must carry transport documentation for the goods; and
(b)
must ensure that the documentation is located in the vehicle in
accordance with Chapter 11.1 of the ADG Code.
Offence provision.".
It is also proposed to amend ADG7 to include a responsibility for supplying transport documents
which are suitable for placing in EIHs to overcome the problem of inappropriate documents being
provided to prime contractors and drivers. Additionally, a new provision will be inserted to prevent
drivers being handed documents in sealed envelopes from consignors as this prevents drivers
meeting their obligations under ADG7.
Draft provision – ADG7
After 11.1.4.3 insert –
"11.1.4.4
Despite 11.1.1.1, the documentation must be of a size, and be in a form, that is
suitable for carrying in the emergency information holder.
11.1.4.5
The documentation must not be in a sealed envelope, or be otherwise kept in a
way that would prevent it from being able to be read by the driver, while it is in
the vehicle.".
Consultation comments
It was submitted that transport documents should be kept with the load, rather than in the driver's
compartment of a vehicle. It was mentioned that 'change-over' is a common linehaul practice – this
involves drivers in separate vehicles swapping trailers at a halfway point between 2 capital cities,
for instance, to enable each driver to return to their home city each evening. It was said that this
frequently results in the transport documents staying with the original prime mover. It was further
suggested that under-trailer document containers should be permitted to avoid problems such as
that.
NTC response: The submission raises new policy issues and will require considerable further
work, so it is not possible to include the suggested change in Package No. 2. The issue will be
referred to the Transport of Dangerous Goods Maintenance Group for consideration.
6.1.14 Retention of documents – prime contractor’s duties
th
The 17 edition of the UN Model Regulations imposes obligations for the retention and
reproduction of documentation and associated information. However, these obligations are
considered regulatory issues and outside the remit of ADG7. The draft provision is designed to
place these obligations in the MSL.
Draft provision
After clause 11.1.7 insert –
"11.1.8 Prime contractor's duties – retention of documents
(1)
This {clause} applies if this Law or the ADG Code requires a prime
contractor to create or use a document in relation to the transport of
dangerous goods.
26
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September 2013
(2)
The prime contractor must retain the document, or a copy of the document,
for at least 3 months after the transport of the dangerous goods by the prime
contractor finishes.
Offence provision.
It is a failure to comply with {subclause} (2) if –
(3)
(a)
a document, or a copy of a document, is not retained on paper and is
not readily legible; and
(b)
a paper copy of the document or copy cannot be readily created at
any time during the 3 months at the request of an authorised officer.".
Consultation comments
1.
It was suggested in 3 submissions that proposed clause 11.1.8(3) imposed a requirement
that requires paper copies of all documents to be kept for 3 months, and that that was not
reasonable.
NTC response: The suggestion is based on a misreading of clause 11.1.8(3). Paragraph (a) of that
provision clearly anticipates that documents will not be kept on paper. Paragraph (b) provides that
that is a problem only if it is not possible to readily create a paper copy of such documents.
Therefore there is no requirement that paper copies must be kept of all documents in order to be
able to comply with 11.1.8.
2.
It was suggested by a regulator that the 3 month period was insufficient for enforcement
purposes, and ideally should be set at 12 months instead.
NTC response: At this stage of the process it is not possible to act on this suggestion, as there is
insufficient time to adequately further consult if a change of this nature was made. The suggestion
will be referred to the Transport of Dangerous Goods Maintenance Group for consideration.
6.1.15 Towing broken down or immobilised vehicle
Division 13.1 of the MSL sets out procedures for dealing with a broken down or immobilised vehicle
transporting a placard load.
Issue
The provision is not clear on what is required if the vehicle to be towed is a licensed dangerous
goods vehicle (for example, tanker, or loaded with IBCs). The provision requires that the driver of a
licensed dangerous goods vehicle be licensed, but it is open to interpretation as to whether that
would also apply to the driver of a vehicle towing a licensed dangerous goods vehicle.
The general policy has been that in such a scenario, the tow truck driver should have a dangerous
goods licence or be accompanied by a licensed dangerous goods driver.
Draft provision
After clause 13.1.2(2) insert –
"(3)
If the road vehicle is towed while still carrying dangerous goods that would require
the driver of the vehicle to hold a dangerous goods driver licence, the prime
contractor must ensure that the driver of the tow truck towing the vehicle:
(a)
holds a dangerous goods driver licence that would authorise him or her to
drive a vehicle with those dangerous goods; or
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September. 2013
27
(b)
is accompanied in the cabin of the tow truck by a person who holds a
dangerous goods driver licence that would authorise him or her to drive a
vehicle with those dangerous goods.
Offence provision.".
Consultation comments
It was suggested that the draft provision is too restrictive and misdirected. First, it was suggested
that the requirement in paragraph (b) that the accompanying person held a dangerous goods driver
licence was not ideal in that the holder of such a licence might not know anything about the
dangerous goods involved in an incident – it was suggested that it would be much better to require
that someone who knew something about the transport hazards of the dangerous goods be
present. Second, it was suggested that there should a mechanism to enable emergency services
to be able to have a vehicle towed.
NTC response: After consultation with the person who sought this amendment, it has been decided
to make no change. With respect to the second point raised, there are other powers provided in
the Model Law and the Model Subordinate Law that would enable emergency services to effect the
same result as what is proposed. With respect to the first point raised, while sympathetic to the
point raised, it is felt the existing proposed provision will be much more workable in practice.
6.1.16 Activation of emergency plans
Clauses 14.2.2 (2) and (3) of the MSL require prime contractors, rail operators and consignors to
have an emergency plan to deal with any dangerous situations involving a placard load.
Issue
While it is an offence to not have an emergency plan, there is no requirement to actually activate
the plan or follow emergency procedures set out in the plan if a dangerous situation does occur.
Currently, simply having an emergency plan on an office bookshelf would be enough to satisfy this
part of the MSL.
Draft provision
(1)
After clause 14.2.2(2) insert –
"(2A)
On becoming aware of a dangerous situation involving a placard load, the
prime contractor or rail operator transporting the load must do everything
that the emergency plan for the transport of the load requires the prime
contractor or rail operator to do that is relevant to the situation.
Offence provision.".
(2)
After clause 14.2.2(3) insert –
"(3A)
On becoming aware of a dangerous situation involving a placard load, the
consignor of the load must do everything that the emergency plan for the
transport of the load requires the consignor to do that is relevant to the
situation.
Offence provision.".
(3)
In clause 14.2.2(4), for "(2) or (3)" substitute "(2), (2A), (3) or (3A)".
Consultation comments
One submission suggested that the active part of the requirement imposed by this provision should
read "enact the plan in order to render every assistance to the Emergency Services and to
minimise the risk to people and the environment". Alternatively, if no change is made, it was
suggested that "relevant to the situation" should be defined.
28
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September 2013
NTC response: The original wording is preferred as giving better effect to the intention behind this
provision. The proposed new wording actually builds in requirements concerning the content of
plans that would best appear in the provision requiring the plan. With respect to the suggestion
that "relevant to the situation" be defined, it is an impossible request, as it would require an attempt
to be made to foresee and to cater for an infinite number and variety of possibilities. It is a very
common drafting practice to use a phrase of this sort in circumstances such as this, and we do not
believe that it will cause any problems in practice here.
6.1.17 Reference of determinations to Competent Authorities Panel (CAP)
Issue
Under the MSL, the process a Competent Authority must undertake in referring exemptions and
approvals to the Competent Authorities Panel (CAP), and the effect of CAP decisions about these
applications, are outlined in Division 16.2 (exemptions) and Division 17.3 (approvals). Currently,
there are no provisions relating to the process and effect of CAP decisions in relation to
determinations.
Additionally, there is a lack of clarity in the legislation about whether a Competent Authority can
refer a matter to CAP either before, or after they have made a decision on the matter at a state or
territory level. In practice, a Competent Authority should be able to put up to CAP either an
undecided application, or a determination, exemption or approval that it has already made or given.
In the latter case, if CAP believes that the determination, exemption or approval should apply
Australia-wide, then the making of that decision should automatically give the determination,
exemption or approval effect across Australia. If CAP does not like the determination, exemption or
approval, it will simply just continue to operate in the jurisdiction in which it was made or given, and
industry members seeking to give it wider application will have to apply for it in other individual
jurisdictions. It is highly desirable that this decision-making process be made explicit.
The proposed changes are primarily designed to bring the provisions concerning determinations in
line with the provisions concerning approvals and exemptions. The changes also clarify that a
Competent Authority can now refer a matter to CAP either before, or after, it has made a decision
on the matter.
Draft provision
After clause 17.1.9 insert –
“Division 17.1A
Reference of determinations to CAP
17.1A.1 References to CAP
(1)
The Competent Authority must refer an application for a determination to CAP if
the Authority considers that the determination should have effect in all
participating jurisdictions or participating jurisdictions including this jurisdiction.
(2)
The Competent Authority must refer to CAP a determination having effect in this
jurisdiction, and 1 or more other participating jurisdictions, if:
(a)
the Authority considers that the determination should be cancelled or
varied; or
(b)
a corresponding authority recommends to the Competent Authority in
writing that the determination should be cancelled or varied.
17.1A.2 Effect of CAP decisions about applications
(1)
This {clause} applies if:
(a)
an application for a determination is referred to CAP under {subclause}
17.1A.1(1); and
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September. 2013
29
(b)
CAP decides:
(i)
that the determination should be given, what the terms of the
determination should be, and that the determination should have
effect in all participating jurisdictions or participating jurisdictions
including this jurisdiction; or
(ii)
(2)
that the determination should not have effect in this jurisdiction.
The Competent Authority must have regard to CAP’s decision.
17.1A.3 Effect of CAP decisions about cancelling or varying determinations
(1)
This {clause} applies if:
(a)
a determination is referred to CAP under {subclause} 17.1A.1(2); and
(b)
CAP decides that the determination:
(i)
should, or should not, be cancelled; or
(ii)
should be varied (whether or not CAP’s decision is the same as the
variation proposed by the Authority), and should have effect as
varied in all participating jurisdictions or in participating jurisdictions
including this jurisdiction; or
(iii)
(2)
should not be varied.
The Competent Authority must have regard to CAP’s decision.".
After clause 15.4.3 insert –
"15.4.3A Reference of matters to CAP for purposes of mutual recognition
(1)
This {clause} applies if the Competent Authority considers that a determination,
exemption or approval that it has made or given should have effect in all
participating jurisdictions or participating jurisdictions including this jurisdiction.
(2)
For the purposes of {clauses} 15.4.1, 15.4.2 and 15.4.3, the Competent
Authority may refer the determination, exemption or approval to CAP.".
6.1.18 Exception to licensing of vehicles
Clause 18.2.1 of the MSL prohibits the use of an unlicensed vehicle to transport receptacles
> 500L capacity or containing > 500kg of dangerous goods.
30
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September 2013
Issue
This wording, caused by the relationship between clause 18.2.1 and section 69 of the Model Law,
creates a problem in that it makes it impossible for an exemption to be granted from clause 18.2.1.
The model legislation only allows an exemption to be granted to a “person or class of persons”. In
clause 18.2.1 there is no responsibility set out for a “person” to use a vehicle that is licensed.
Therefore, it is not possible to exempt a “vehicle” from the requirement to be licensed.
The draft provision provides a mechanism to overcome this problem by using the power that
Competent Authorities already have to make determinations in relation to the use of vehicles.
Draft provision
(1)
In clause 18.2.1, for "A road" substitute "(1) A road".
(2)
At the end of clause 18.2.1 insert –
"(2)
If the Competent Authority has determined under {clause} 1.6.3 that a vehicle
that is not licensed under this Part may be used to transport the dangerous
goods described in {subclause} (1), the vehicle may be used to transport the
goods without complying with that {subclause}.".
6.1.19 Clarification of insurance requirements
Part 20 of the MSL sets out insurance requirements:
In each case, this is further clarified to mean that this requirement covers rigid vehicles and trailers:
Issue
The wording of subclause (2) was designed to exclude prime movers and to include, for example,
two B-Double trailers with different owners. However, it has caused some confusion and is being
interpreted by some operators and insurers as meaning that increased cover is required for
combinations (for example, $10m for a B-Double, $15m for a road train).
As this was not intended to be the case, it is proposed to add an explanatory note to clarify that
more than one trailer in a combination can be covered under the same $5m policy.
Draft provision
At the end of clauses 20.1.1(2) and 20.1.2(2) insert –
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September. 2013
31
"Note
Under {clause} 1.2.1, vehicle is defined as including a combination. It is not the
purpose of this {subclause} to require insurance in respect of each individual component of a
combination being used in a combination. In the case of a combination, {subclause} (1) only
requires that there be insurance for the combination as a whole.".
32
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September 2013
6.2
Maintenance amendments – ADG7
This section explains the proposed miscellaneous amendments to ADG7, and includes the draft
amendments. These correspond with the draft provisions in Schedule 3 of Package No. 2. Based
on preliminary consultation with industry, these amendments are not expected to have cost
implications.
A number of the draft amendments enshrine exemptions to ADG7 that have been granted by the
Competent Authorities Panel (CAP) since 2007. Under the transport of dangerous goods legislative
package, applications can be made to CAP for exemptions from certain requirements of ADG7
where the requirements are excessively onerous, or cannot be complied with, in particular
situations. To obtain an exemption, applicants are required to provide detailed information on the
reasons why a particular exemption should apply under the specified circumstances, and to
demonstrate that the granting of the exemption will not lead to a reduction in safety.
There are a number of exemptions currently in place that apply industry-wide at a national level,
and that the Maintenance Group has recommended should be enshrined in ADG7 on the basis that
they are operating as intended, and have not led to a reduction in safety. This will have the benefit
of providing certainty to industry and reducing the administrative load for CAP.
Where a draft amendment is intended to give effect to an exemption, this is indicated below in the
explanation accompanying the amendment.
6.2.1 Commencement of changes made by Amendment Package No. 2
Issue arising post consultation
Although Amendment Package No. 2 has a commencement provision that specifies when the
amendments to ADG7 in the Package are to come into effect, there is a danger that that
commencement provision will not be read into ADG7. Thus in jurisdictions that automatically pick
up amendments to ADG7 (all jurisdictions except Queensland, South Australia and Western
Australia), there is a possibility that the amendments made to ADG7 by Amendment Package No. 2
may be interpreted as coming into force when they are approved by Ministers, rather than on the
intended date of 1 July 2014. In this scenario it is also possible that the 12 month transition period
may not be recognised.
Therefore it is considered prudent to ensure that the commencement and transitional provisions be
incorporated directly into ADG7.
Draft provision
After 1.1.1.6 insert –
"1.1.1.7
Commencement of changes made by Amendment Package No. 2
The amendments made to this Code by the Model Amendment Regulations –
Transport of Dangerous Goods by Road or Rail – Package No. 2 approved by
the Standing Council on Transport and Infrastructure on 15 November 2013
take effect on 1 July 2014.
However, a person does not commit an offence against, under, or in relation to
this Code as amended by Schedule 3 or 4 of that Amendment Package if the
person transports dangerous goods by road or rail before 1 July 2015 in
accordance with this Code in the form it was in immediately before
1 July 2014.".
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September. 2013
33
6.2.2 Labelling and marking – consistency with GHS and other standards
Marking and labelling requirements are contained in Chapter 5.2 of ADG7.
Issue
It is intended that these requirements allow for labelling and marking in accordance with the
Globalised Harmonised System (GHS) for hazardous substances and other relevant Standards.
Feedback has been received from industry that the current wording in ADG7 in relation to GHS is
confusing and in some cases appears internally inconsistent and in conflict with other Australian
and international requirements.
It is proposed to make the following amendments to ensure the ADG is compatible with GHS. This
includes adopting the GHS definition of “article”, and ensuring that the GHS references work
technically, given the variety of forms GHS can take. The amendments will also address a technical
problem in the way the labelling provisions of ADG7 were structured and make a specific exception
for GHS.
Additionally, the amendments will update references to Australian standards and remove
inconsistencies in requirements between ADG7 and other Standards.
Draft provisions
Definition of article (clause 2)
In 1.2.1.1, after the definition of Animal material insert –
"Article means a manufactured item, other than a fluid or particle, that –
(a) is formed into a particular shape or design during manufacture; and
(b) has hazard properties and a function that are wholly or partly dependent on the
shape or design –
and includes automotive and marine batteries and other large batteries such as those
used in telecommunications facilities, small and other assorted batteries, aerosols, gasfilled lighters, seat belt pre-tensioners and refrigerating machines;".
Consultation comments
Two submissions suggested that it would be desirable to extend the list of examples to include
small batteries, aerosols and gas-filled lighters.
NTC response: Agree. The suggested additional examples have been added.
Interpretation of references to GHS (clause 6)
After 1.2.3.2 insert –
"1.2.3.3 Interpretation of references to GHS
1.2.3.3.1
For the purposes of this Code, a thing is marked in accordance with GHS if the
marking complies with the version of GHS that applies in the jurisdiction of origin
of the thing, or if the marking otherwise complies with the GHS law in that
jurisdiction, and if any words in the marking are in English."
Consultation comments
1.
It was suggested that this provision was "bureaucracy gone mad", essentially on the basis
that "just referring to the GHS leaves it open to any edition being considered acceptable, is that
such a problem?" The following query was also raised: "What happens when an inner is
marked/labelled in accordance with one version of GHS when it is packed, and then the law in the
34
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September 2013
state (or for that matter country) of origin changes?". There was also a suggestion that this
provision would be difficult to enforce.
NTC response: With respect to the first point, this provision has been inserted to attempt to
eliminate arguments as to which version of GHS should apply. The definition of GHS in 1.2.3.1
leaves open the argument that the only valid version of GHS for the purposes of ADG7 is the
version published by the UN at the time ADG7 came into force. If that argument were to prevail
that would create significant problems.
With respect to the second query raised, so long as the state/country of origin recognises the
validity of marking applied under the previous versions of GHS that applied in that state/country,
proposed 1.2.3.3.1 also recognises that marking as being valid, as it "otherwise complies with the
law in that jurisdiction". When new versions of GHS take force, in the vast majority of cases it is
expected that previous markings will be recognised.
With respect to enforcement, 1.2.3.3.1 is not an offence provision of any sort – it is essentially a
permissive provision that is intended to improve the interface between GHS and ADG7.
2.
It was suggested that it was unclear what a "thing" is, and that it would be better to use
"article" instead. Another submission stated "it is unclear what the boundary of a 'thing' is and the
application on how it applies". Another submission described the use of "thing" as "not sufficiently
descriptive and clumsy".
NTC response: Although the use of 'thing' often raises aesthetic concerns, in practice it is generally
found to be very useful as it does away with arguments as to whether any particular thing is
covered by the provision. Concepts such as articles, substances or items are narrower in scope
and give rise to arguments as to what is and is not covered. Where the intention is to cover
everything and anything, to not have any boundaries, which is the intention with this provision, then
the use of 'thing' is the best option.
3.
It was suggested that this provision "will restrict trade by introducing Australian specific
requirements".
NTC response: This suggestion misunderstands what 1.2.3.3.1 is intended to achieve – in fact it
does the opposite of what is suggested. Rather than introducing Australia–specific requirements,
this provision has the effect of ensuring that if a provision of ADG7 states that it recognises a GHS
marking, then that means that recognition under ADG7 is extended to any GHS marking that has
been validly placed on a thing in a country or state under the GHS law of that country/state,
regardless of whether any Australian jurisdiction uses the same version of GHS.
4.
It was suggested that the provision permitted the use of a foreign language in a GHS
marking for Australian purposes.
NTC response: Agree, and also agree that it is an unintended result. A further qualification
concerning the use of English has been added to the draft provision.
Marking of inner packages (clause 15)
(1)
In 5.2.1.8, for "Except where labelled and marked" substitute "Unless marked".
(2)
In 5.2.1.8, in Table 5.1, in the columns relating to Class or Division 2.1 and 2.3, for "30
ml" substitute "50 ml".
(3)
In 5.2.1.8, in note a under Table 5.1, for "AS 2278" substitute "AS 2278.1".
(4)
In 5.2.1.8, at the end of note c under Table 5.1 insert ", Division 6.2 Category B is not
required to be marked".
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September. 2013
35
Labelling provisions (clause 16)
For the heading "5.2.2.1 Labelling provisions", the 2 notes immediately beneath that
heading, and 5.2.2.1.1 substitute –
"5.2.2.1 Labelling provisions
NOTE:
These provisions relate essentially to danger labels. However, additional
markings or symbols indicating precautions to be taken in handling or storing a
package (e.g. a symbol representing an umbrella indicating that a package must
be kept dry) may be displayed on a package if appropriate.
5.2.2.1.1
All dangerous goods packages, cylinders, pressure drums, tubes, MEGCs, IBCs,
overpacks and unpackaged articles that are subject to this Code must have a
label that identifies the primary and subsidiary risks of the dangerous goods and
that conforms to models Nos. 1 to 9 illustrated in 5.2.2.2.2, except:
(a)
those IBCs, pressure drums, tubes, MEGCs and articles which are
placardable units that are placarded with emergency information panels in
accordance with Chapter 5.3; or
(b)
where there is an exemption from labelling in an applicable Special
Provision in Chapter 3.3; or
(c)
for dangerous goods in limited quantities that are packed and marked in
accordance with Chapter 3.4; or
(d)
where permitted in Chapter 7.3 for retail distribution loads; or
(e)
in the case of inner packaging, where there is existing marking equivalent
to the label that complies with GHS.
For the purposes of this provision, the “EXPLOSIVE” subsidiary risk label is model No. 1.
NOTE 1 Unlike earlier editions, in this Code a label identifying a subsidiary risk is now
identical to the Class or Division label used for the same hazard, as illustrated in
5.2.2.2.2. The appropriate Class or Division number indicating the subsidiary risk
must be displayed in the bottom corner of the label.
NOTE 2 For paragraph (e), see 1.2.3.3.1 for how references to GHS are to be
interpreted.".
Change to GHS references (clause 17)
(1)
In 5.2.1.8 –
(a)
omit "labelled and";
(b)
after "Table 5.1 following:" insert –
"NOTE:
(2)
See 1.2.3.3.1 for how references to GHS are to be interpreted.".
In 5.2.2.1.13.1 –
(a)
omit "labelled and";
(b)
after "in the table at 5.2.1.8." insert –
"NOTE:
See 1.2.3.3.1 for how references to GHS are to be interpreted.".
Consultation comments
1.
Several submissions suggested that amendments should be made to ensure that
references to GHS explicitly included GHS pictograms and hazard statements.
36
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September 2013
NTC response: It is possible that the current references can be interpreted to achieve the result
sought, particularly with regard to pictograms. To the extent that more explicit provision is needed,
it was clear from the submissions that a fair bit of more detailed policy work is needed to ensure
that the more explicit provisions work as intended. This issue will therefore be referred to the
Transport of Dangerous Goods Maintenance Group for consideration.
2.
One submission suggested that proposed 5.2.2.1.1(e) would allow the GHSW flame
pictogram to replace 2.1, 3, 4.1, 4.2, 4.3 and some 5.2 DG class/division diamonds, and that this
was not desirable. A separate submission raised similar concerns, and suggested that this
provision was only intended to apply to inner packagings.
NTC response: Agree that 5.2.2.1.1(e) is expressed too widely at present. It has been amended to
confine its scope to inner packagings.
6.2.3 Change to term used for transport units
th
Under the 17 edition of the UN Model Regulations the term “transport unit” has been updated to
“cargo transport unit”.
Draft provision
(1)
After 1.2.1.2.2 insert –
"1.2.1.2.2A Cargo Transport Unit – (Regulation 1.2.13)
A cargo transport unit includes:
(a)
a road transport tank, or freight, vehicle; or
(b)
a railway transport tank, or freight, wagon; or
(c)
a portable tank; or
(d)
a bulk container; or
(e)
a freight container; or
(f)
a MEGC.".
(2)
Omit 1.2.1.2.16.
(3)
In the Code, before "transport unit" (wherever occurring) insert "cargo".
6.2.4 Goods too dangerous to be transported
This amendment is required as a result of changes that will be made to special provisions 349 to
353 by the UN16/17 changes.
Draft provision
After 1.2.1.2.6(b) insert –
"(ba)
goods or combinations of goods for which the statement ‘are not to be
accepted for transport’ applies in a special provision in Chapter 3.3 of this Code
that is applied to the goods by column (6) of the Dangerous Goods List; or"
6.2.5 Definition of tanks
Issue
1.2.1.2.14 of ADG7 currently outlines what is considered to be a tank. It also includes a list of
exclusions which is incomplete. For completeness, tanks should also exclude large packagings,
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September. 2013
37
freight containers and segregation devices that comply with Chapters 6.6, 6.10 and 6.11
respectively.
Draft provision
In 1.2.1.2.14.2 –
(a)
omit "fixed storage tanks,";
(b)
for paragraph (d) substitute –
"(d)
IBCs, MEGCs, cylinders, tubes or pressure drums; or
(e)
large packagings that comply with Chapter 6.6 of this Code; or
(f)
freight containers that comply with Chapter 6.10 of this Code; or
(g)
segregation devices that comply with Chapter 6.11 of this Code.".
6.2.6 Interpretation of references to GHS
See Section 6.2.2
6.2.7 Updating of Australian Standard references
AS 2278 has been updated to AS 2278.1. ADG7 will be amended accordingly.
Draft provision
In 1.2.3, in Table 1.1, for "AS 2278" substitute "AS 2278.1".
6.2.8 Omission of most of 2.7
Chapter 2.7 of ADG7 sets out provisions for Class 7, radioactive material. Although the note at the
start of the Chapter makes it clear that the transport of Class 7 dangerous goods is not subject to
ADG7, and that the Chapter is provided for information only, the Maintenance Group felt that it
would be better to remove almost all of the Chapter. This was done in the revised version of ADG7
that accompanied the public consultation version of Package No. 2, but the provisions needed to
support the amendment were not included in the Package. The draft provision remedies that
omission. Amendments made by UN16 and UN17 to Chapter 2.7 have also been removed from
Schedule 4 of Package No. 2.
Draft provision
In Chapter 2.7 –
(a)
rd
in Note 1, for the 3 paragraph substitute:
"2.7.2.1.1 and Table 2.7.2.1.1 are provided for information only.".
(b)
omit 2.7.1;
(c)
omit 2.7.2.2 – 2.7.2.5.
6.2.9 Dangerous Goods List
The Dangerous Goods List in Chapter 3.2 of ADG7 contains class 1 explosives and class 7
radioactive materials even though these materials are not regulated by the Code. A note has been
included to clarify that these materials are listed for information purposes only.
38
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September 2013
Draft provision
(1)
(2)
In 3.2.0 –
(a)
in the Note, after "NOTE" insert "1";
(b)
after the Note insert –
"NOTE 2:
The List includes dangerous goods of Class 1 (Explosive
substances or articles) and Class 7 (Radioactive material), even
though this Code does not contain substantive provisions in
relation to either of those Classes, other than in an incidental way.
These items have been included in the List for information
purposes only.
NOTE 3:
The List also includes goods that are only dangerous goods when
transported by sea or air.".
In 3.2.0.1 –
(a)
after "for UN15" insert ", UN16 and UN17";
(b)
in paragraph (a), after "UN 14/15" insert ", as updated by UN16 and UN17".
Consultation comments
A comment was received that proposed note 2 was unnecessary, because similar information also
appears in other places in ADG7. It was also suggested that the note was incomplete, because
there were other dangerous goods in the List that were not dangerous goods for land transport
purposes.
NTC response: Our general preference is to include explanatory material where we think it might
be helpful. In this case our preference is to add another note to cover the gap that has been
identified.
6.2.10 Phase-out of Australian names
As stated in 3.2.5.3 of ADG7, the usage of those [AUST.] entries to which Note F is applied in
Table 3.2 should be phased out during the life of ADG7, in anticipation that their usage will not be
permitted by subsequent editions.
Draft provision
(1)
For 3.2.5.3 substitute –
"3.2.5.3
(2)
3.2.5.1 ceases to apply to the previously permitted [AUST.] entries to which
th
Note F was applied in Table 3.2 of the original version of the 7 Edition of
this Code on or after 1 July 2015 (the current Note F to Table 3.2 lists these
previously permitted entries).".
In 3.2.5, for Table 3.2 substitute –
"Table 3.2
Relevant UN Number Entry in 3.2.3
for Classification, Packing and Tank Requirements
(2)
[AUST.] Entry
(1)
AVIATION GASOLINE [AUST.]
AVIATION TURBINE FUEL
[AUST.] Entries
1203
1863
MOTOR SPIRIT or GASOLINE or PETROL
FUEL, AVIATION, TURBINE ENGINE
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September. 2013
Usage –
see Notes
(3)
A, B, C
A, B, C
39
(1)
[AUST.]
LP GAS [AUST.]
MINERAL TURPENTINE [AUST.]
PETROLEUM FUEL [AUST.]
UN 1270
TOXIC LIQUID, ORGANIC,
(CYTOTOXIC DRUG) [AUST.]
TOXIC SOLID, ORGANIC,
(CYTOTOXIC DRUG) [AUST.]
WHITE SPIRIT [AUST.]
Usage –
see Notes
(3)
Relevant UN Number Entry in 3.2.3
for Classification, Packing and Tank Requirements
(2)
[AUST.] Entry
1075
1300
– see
3.2.5.4
2810
PETROLEUM GASES, LIQUEFIED
TURPENTINE SUBSTITUTE
Determine from the relevant entries in Table 3.1
A, B, C
D
B, E
TOXIC LIQUID, ORGANIC, N.O.S.
G
2811
TOXIC SOLID, ORGANIC, N.O.S.
G
1300
TURPENTINE SUBSTITUTE
D
NOTE: These uses are valid only for land transport within Australia
A
Use permitted as Proper Shipping Name on package marking
B
Use permitted as Proper Shipping Name on Emergency Information Panels
C
Use permitted as Proper Shipping Name on transport documentation
D
Use permitted as Proper Shipping Name for inner packaging marking
E
For conditions on use of UN 1270, see 3.2.5.4 and 5.3.1.3.3
F
Usage of those [AUST.] names to which Note F was assigned in Table 3.2 of the original
th
version of the 7 Edition of this Code will no longer be permitted on or after 1 July 2015
th
(which is the date the change to the original version of the 7 Edition of this Code takes full
effect). Entries that will not be accepted as Proper Shipping Names on or after that date
are:

ASPHALT CUT BACKS [AUST.],
CUT BACKS, ASPHALT [AUST.],

DRIERS, PAINT or VARNISH, LIQUID, [AUST.], N.O.S.,
or 3066
ENAMEL [AUST.],
FILLERS, liquid [AUST.], LACQUER [AUST.],
POLISH [AUST.],
STAINS [AUST.],
VARNISH [AUST.],
THINNERS [AUST.], THINNING LIQUID [AUST.]
┬

ETHYLENE GLYCOL DIMETHYLETHER [AUST.]
–
UN 2252

METHYLENE CHLORIDE [AUST.]
–
UN 1593
BITUMEN CUT BACKS [AUST.], ┬
CUT BACKS, BITUMEN [AUST.] ┘
UN 1999
UN 1263
┤
┤
┘
th
It should also be noted that under the original version of the 7 Edition of this Code, the use
of the [AUST.] entry was not permitted for Cut Backs that were not Class 3 and to which
UN 3257 applied due to transport at elevated temperature.
G
These entries must be used for cytotoxic drugs that meet the criteria for packing group I.
Despite the assignment of SP 274 to these two UN numbers in the principal Dangerous
Goods List, where either of these [AUST.] entries is shown in full as the Proper Shipping
Name, it is not necessary to supplement this with the Technical Name on marking or
documentation. UN 1851 (liquid) or UN 3249 (solid) must be used for drugs of packing
group II or III.".
(3)
In 3.2.3 (the Dangerous Goods List), for the entries relating to UN 1263, UN 1593,
UN 1999, UN 2252 and UN 3066, in column 2 omit "(see 3.2.5 for relevant [AUST.]
entries)".
6.2.11 Australian special provisions – AU03 Transport of unodourised LPG
At present, AU03 forbids the transport of unodourised LP Gas unless exempted by the relevant
Competent Authority. Requests for such exemptions are made frequently, and are granted subject
to those receiving the exemptions complying with a fairly uniform set of conditions. In view of that, it
40
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September 2013
was felt that the exemption process could be simplified if the conditions were enshrined in AU03
itself.
Draft provision
(2)
In 3.3.3, for AU03 substitute –
"AU03 Unodourised LP Gas may only be transported if each of the following conditions is
met:
(a)
each route used for the transport must have been determined by an
appropriate risk management assessment; and
(b)
each load must be accompanied by a gas detector suitable for the detection
of LP Gas, in accordance with AS 1596, and by a person trained in its
operation; and
(c)
that person must use the gas detector to check for the presence of LP Gas in
the vicinity of the load at each routine stop that the vehicle makes, and on
any other occasion when there is a significant risk that LP Gas may have
leaked, and must record in writing the details of each test; and
(d)
the word "Unodourised" must be included as part of the shipping name
displayed on vehicle emergency information panels; and
(e)
a copy of the Transport Emergency Response Plan must be provided to the
relevant hazmat incident combat agency before the journey commences.
This provision does not apply to South Australia. The transport of unodourised LP Gas is
prohibited in South Australia unless exempted by the Competent Authority in South
Australia.".
Consultation comments
1.
It was noted that the revised AU03 only covers the transport of unodourised LPG in tanks
or tankers – it does not cover transport in cylinders and pressure drums. It was also suggested
that it is not legally valid to make special provision for South Australia.
NTC response: With respect to the first point, the provision is worded in the way requested by the
Competent Authorities and reflects current practice. It is also unclear on what basis the claim is
made that the provision is restricted in the way suggested.
With respect to the second point, there is no legal impediment that we are aware of that would
prevent the naming of South Australia in the way that it has been named in the revised AU03. The
same effect could be achieved by South Australia in its own legislation, but doing it in the way that
has been done here has the advantage of making it clear in ADG7 itself how AU03 is to apply in
Australia.
2.
It was noted that there was no point in requiring a gas detector if there was no
concomitant requirement that the gas detector be used.
NTC response: Agree. A new paragraph (c) has been added.
3.
On the other hand, another submission suggested that the requirement to require a gas
detector and operator was not required, particularly in the rail context, where alternative methods
such as telemetry or a pressure recording device could be used instead.
NTC response: In the context of this provision, it is open to operators who wish to use an
alternative method to obtain an exemption from the relevant Competent Authority in the way that
has to be done at present for each movement of unodourised LP Gas. The new provision is
essentially permissive, rather than prescriptive.
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September. 2013
41
4.
It was suggested that it would be desirable to ensure that emergency services were
notified of each journey before it occurred.
NTC response: Agree. Additional words have been added to paragraph (e) to give effect to this
suggestion.
15. Australian special provisions – AU07 Chlorine
AU07 has been amended to remove transitional arrangements in place until 1 January 2011 as
these arrangements are no longer relevant.
Draft provision
(4)
In 3.3.3, for AU07 substitute –
"AU07 UN 1017 CHLORINE has a subsidiary risk 5.1, as well as 8. Despite this, when
transported in cylinders, pressure drums, MEGCs or tanks, chlorine gas is not
considered incompatible with dangerous goods of Class 8 or 9, or Division 6.1,
or combustible liquids.".
6.2.12 P62A Clinical Waste – mobile garbage bins
NSW Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and WorkCover have recently reviewed ADG7
instructions for UN3291 clinical waste in order to give the waste industry a clear understanding of
what ADG7 actually requires. ADG7 provides several packing instructions for clinical waste – P621,
IBC620, LP621. These are similar and require rigid, leakproof packagings, with additional
requirements for sharps containers.
ADG7 also allows packing instruction P62A for clinical waste. P62A was introduced with ADG7, in
consultation with the waste industry, to allow the use of mobile garbage bins that did not
necessarily comply with the stricter requirements of the other packing instructions, on condition that
the mobile garbage bins were transported in dedicated vehicles approved to carry clinical waste.
Such vehicles are required to be closed, rigid-sided, lockable units able to contain any spill. This
would result in two levels of containment.
Issue
The NSW EPA / WorkCover review indicated that industry was not clear on which packing
instructions applied to the transport receptacles commonly used by health facilities (mobile garbage
bins – MGBs). MGBs come in various sizes – from 50L to 1100L capacity. There is confusion as to
whether P62A applies to the larger bins and whether the larger bins should comply with BK2
provisions.
The review also found the following inconsistencies in P62A:
•
The reference in the 2nd paragraph to special provisions of 4.1.8 of ADG7 is incorrect as
4.1.8 relates to UN2814 and UN2900 while P62A covers only UN3291.
•
The phrase For packages containing larger quantities of liquid is meaningless and may
have been inadvertently picked up from other packing instructions when P62A was drafted.
The waste industry is also proposing to amend their Code of Practice to permit the use of curtainsided vehicles to transport clinical waste, while believing that they could still use MGBs.
Clarification will also prevent that misconception.
Draft provision
In 4.1.4.1, for Packing Instruction P62A substitute –
42
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September 2013
LP/P62A
PACKING INSTRUCTION [Aust.]
LP/P62A
This instruction applies to UN 3291 Clinical Waste that is transported in cargo transport units
that are dedicated to clinical waste transport, where those units consist of a vehicle with a
body that is:
(a)
separate to the cabin; and
(b)
totally enclosed, of strong, rigid, weatherproof construction with lockable doors;
and
(c)
leak proof, bundled or configured to contain spillages.
The following packages are authorised:
Rigid packaging with a lid that is able to be secured during transport. The packages must be:
(a)
designed or have a means enabling them to be easily handled or moved; and
(b)
strong enough to withstand manual or mechanical handling and the shocks and loadings
normally encountered during transport, including trans-shipment between transport
units and between transport units and warehouses; and
(c)
able to retain liquid under normal conditions of transport; and
(d)
easily identifiable by their colour and have the correct labelling and symbols indicating
that they contain UN3291 clinical waste.
Additional requirement:
Packagings intended to contain sharp objects such as broken glass and needles must be
resistant to puncture and comply with AS 4031, AS/NZS 4261 or AS 4939, as applicable.
6.2.13 Guidelines for underslung segregation devices
Dangerous goods of packing group II or III may be transported together with incompatible goods,
where either the dangerous goods or the incompatible goods are packed in a segregation device
complying with ADG7 or in accordance with some other method of segregation approved by the
Competent Authority.
ADG7 permits the use of segregation devices fitted below the main load area (underslung
segregation devices) where they meet the definition of a Type 1 device as set out in 6.11.3 of
ADG7. A proposed underslung segregation device that does not comply with the above criteria (for
example, capacity greater than 450 litres, or of unusual construction or form of attachment)
requires approval as “another method” of segregation. The Competent Authorities Panel has
endorsed guidelines in relation to such approvals, and it is desirable that significant parts of those
guidelines be incorporated into ADG7.
Draft provision
(1)
In 4.4.5.1.3 –
(a)
in paragraph (c), for "6.11.4." substitute "6.11.4; or";
(b)
after paragraph (c) insert –
"(d)
(2)
a Non-Type I Underslung Segregation Device in accordance with 6.11.7.".
In 4.4.5.3.2 and 5.2.2.1.14, after "segregation devices" insert "and Non-Type I
underslung segregation devices".
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September. 2013
43
(3)
After 4.4.5.3.2 insert –
"4.4.5.4
Non-Type I Underslung Segregation Device
4.4.5.4.1
Equipment such as tools or jacks must not be stored in a Non-Type I
underslung segregation device at any time while the device contains
dangerous goods.".
(4)
In 6.11.1 –
(a)
in paragraph (c), for "6.11.6." substitute "6.11.6; or";
(b)
after paragraph (c) insert –
"(d)
(5)
a Non-Type I Underslung Segregation Device.".
After 6.11.6 insert –
"6.11.7
NON-TYPE I UNDERSLUNG PROTECTION DEVICE
6.11.7.1
Any proposed underslung segregation device (which is not a Type I device)
submitted for approval must comply with the requirements in this subsection
and must be approved by the Competent Authority.
6.11.7.2
Design and construction requirements
6.11.7.2.1
The device must be designed to a maximum design load and be built
with sufficient strength and rigidity to transport the maximum design load
without failure or such distortion as would compromise any of the
device's function or features.
6.11.7.2.2
The device must be fitted with a permanently attached door and be
liquid tight.
6.11.7.2.3
The device must have a door fitted with at least 2 securing devices and
be capable of being locked against unauthorised access.
6.11.7.2.4
The device must be permanently attached to the vehicle to withstand a
2g force in any direction when loaded to its maximum design load.
6.11.7.2.5
The device must have a smooth interior free of any protrusion or fitting
likely to damage packages within.
6.11.7.2.6
The device must be easy to clean and free from cavities where spillage
or dirt or contaminants might collect.
6.11.7.2.7
The device must have a means of draining any liquid from the device
which may accumulate due to leakage of any contents. When the device
is in use the drainage facility must be tightly sealed.
6.11.7.2.8
The device, including supports and attachments, must have a ground
clearance of at least 350mm and not project beyond the perimeter of the
vehicle.
6.11.7.3
6.11.7.3.1
Application for approval
An application for the approval of a Competent Authority of a proposed
underslung segregation device must be in writing and must include:
(a)
44
a full description of the device;
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September 2013
6.11.7.4
(b)
details of the dimensions, volumetric capacity and maximum
design load (kg) of the device;
(c)
signed detailed drawings of the device;
(d)
details of the materials used in the device;
(e)
details of the construction of the device;
(f)
details of how the device is to be attached to the vehicle;
(g)
any other information necessary to enable an assessment of
whether the device complies with 6.11.7.2.
Approval number to be displayed
6.11.7.4.1
An approved underslung segregation device must be clearly and
permanently marked, in a conspicuous position, in lettering not less than
25mm high with the following:
(a)
for a device approved by a Competent Authority:
Name of Competent Authority
APPROVED SEGREGATION DEVICE
FOR USE IN (State/Territory) ONLY
APPROVAL XXX DESIGN LOAD YYY
(b)
for a device approved by the Competent Authorities Panel:
AUSTRALIAN COMPETENT AUTHORITIES
APPROVED SEGREGATION DEVICE
FOR USE IN AUSTRALIA ONLY
CAP REFERENCE CA20--/---DESIGN LOAD YYY
where XXX is the approval number issued by the Competent Authority and
YYY is the maximum weight, in kg, that the device may carry.".
Consultation comments
1.
It was suggested that the name "Non-Type I Underslung Segregation Device" was an
"abomination of a name" and should be referred to as a Type 3 device.
NTC response: While we are very sympathetic to the suggestion, these provisions are based on
existing Competent Authority Panel guidelines that have been in operation for some time using the
Non-Type I name. There is a significant risk that a unilateral change of name at this late stage may
cause confusion.
2.
Two submissions were made with respect to proposed 6.11.7.2.2. One suggested that
"liquid tight" was inappropriate, in that it meant that the compartment would not let out any liquid
regardless of what position it was in. It was suggested that it should be enough that the
compartment prevented rain from entering, and contained any spills in the compartment. The other
submission suggested that the provision was inappropriate if the device was used to transport gas
containers.
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September. 2013
45
NTC response: As this provision is based on existing guidelines, it should only be amended with
extreme care. With respect to the first suggestion, it is difficult to see how the requested provision
could be drafted. The wish that the compartment still be able to contain spills creates the difficulty
that there is almost no legally describable difference between that and the concept of "liquid tight".
The second suggestion seems to be suggesting an even higher standard than currently exists.
That is a change that should only be made after further policy work and consultation.
3.
A further suggestion was made that a new requirement should be added to the effect that
the compartment should also be designed to withstand the impact of rocks and debris thrown up
from the road.
NTC response: As with the previous suggestion, the suggested change should only be made after
further policy work and consultation.
6.2.14 Marking of overpacks containing LQs
An exemption (CA2010/43) has been granted by the Competent Authorities Panel that allows the
use of limited quantities markings on an overpack where all the dangerous goods in the overpack
are LQ items but the LQ labels within the overpack are not visible (for example, if obscured by
black plastic shrinkwrap). As this is an exemption that should apply generally, the draft provision
replicates it in ADG7.
Draft provision
After 5.1.2.1.2 insert –
"5.1.2.1.3 Despite 5.1.2.1.1, if markings and labels representative of all dangerous goods in
the overpack are not visible, and all of the dangerous goods are limited quantity items, the
overpack may be marked with the limited quantity marking specified in Chapter 3.4.".
6.2.15 Omission of transitional provision concerning orientation arrows
The transitional arrangements in 5.1.2.1.3 of ADG7 relate to the UN 14 Model Regulations and are
no longer relevant.
Draft provision
Omit 5.2.1.7.4 and the note immediately beneath 5.2.1.7.4.
6.2.16 Marking of inner packages
See section 6.2.2
6.2.17 Labelling provisions
See section 6.2.2
6.2.18 Change to GHS references
See section 6.2.2
6.2.19 Reduction in labelling size on certain batteries
An exemption (CA2012/01) has been granted by the Competent Authorities Panel that permits the
transport of vehicle batteries (UN 2794) with a corrosives class 8 label to a size less than what is
46
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September 2013
required by Table 5.2 of ADG7. As this is an exemption that should apply generally, the draft
provision replicates it in ADG7.
Draft provision
In 5.2.2.2.1.9, in Table 5.2 –
st
(a)
at the top of the 1 column, after "Class" insert "or Article";
(b)
after the 3 row insert the following row –
rd
BATTERIES, WET,
FILLED WITH
ACID, electric
storage (UN 2794)
Battery with a gross mass
of 65kg or less, but top
surface only
20 x 20
3
6.2.20 Placard load – minimum quantities
This is a minor amendment to clarify the meaning of a provision in the table that specifies the
minimum quantities for placard loads.
Draft provision
st
In 5.3.1, in Table 5.3, in paragraph (a) of the 1 column, after "receptacle" insert "(other
than an article)".
6.2.21 Environmental Hazardous Substance mark on Emergency Information Panels (EIPs)
5.3.2.3 of ADG7 provides that an Environmental Hazardous Substance (EHS) mark should be
displayed on certain transport units.
Issue
The question has arisen as to whether the EHS mark should be incorporated in an EIP when
required to be displayed, similar to a subsidiary risk label or elevated temperature substance mark.
The practice is for these marks to be included in EIPs. As with other labels, minimum size
requirements ensure that the information contained within the EIP is legible.
For clarity it is proposed that a new 5.3.2.3.1 be added.
Draft provision
After 5.3.2.3.1 insert –
"5.3.2.3.2
If the environmentally hazardous substance mark is incorporated in an
emergency information panel, the sides of the mark must measure at least
150 mm.".
Consultation comments
Several submissions appear to have misread this provision as requiring an environmentally
hazardous substance mark to be included in an emergency information panel.
NTC response: In our view this provision is merely an adjunct to such a requirement. Thus, there
is nothing in this provision that requires the use of the mark in a panel. If another provision of
ADG7 requires that the mark be included in a panel, then this provision is triggered and further
requires that the mark be at least 150 mm. If there is no requirement elsewhere in ADG7 that
requires the use of the mark in a panel, then this provision has no application.
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September. 2013
47
6.2.22 Placarding freight containers and intermodal loads
Issue
As a result of changes made by the UN17 amendments, freight containers that are marked with the
new limited quantities marking first permitted by UN16 regularly arrive in Australia. At present
those markings are not permitted on freight containers under ADG7. To prevent the need for remarking to occur before the containers can be moved from a port, it is desirable that ADG7 permit
the carriage of those containers. The draft provision permits this in cases where the marking
complies with another intermodal code.
Draft provision
(1)
In 5.3.5.2.2, after "class or division," insert "except where 5.3.8.2 applies,".
(2)
In 5.3.5.2.3, after "in the freight container," insert "except where 5.3.8.2
applies,".
(3)
In 5.3.8 –
(a)
before "A freight container" insert "5.3.8.1";
(b)
after this provision insert –
"5.3.8.2
Despite anything to the contrary in this Chapter, a freight
container in which the only dangerous goods being
transported are in limited quantities may be placarded with
the marking shown in 3.4.6 or 3.4.8, if the conditions
specified in paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) of 5.3.8.1 apply.".
Consultation comments
1.
A comment was made that the phrase "a freight container in which dangerous goods in
limited quantities are being transported …" limits the application of this clause to containers that
only have dangerous goods in limited quantities. An alternative phrase was suggested.
NTC response: Agree. As the clause does not reflect its original intention, we have amended
5.3.8.2 by adopting the alternative phrase that was suggested.
2.
Following on from the previous comment, it was then stated:
This concession, however, actually increases the difficulty of the transport task,
particularly for the driver collecting the container from the port. When asked to pick
up the container placarded LQ, s/he is confronted with the task of trying to
determine what placarding s/he must apply to the front and rear of the vehicle
before leaving the port in order to comply with 5.3.6.1. To get around this, my
suggestion is to allow the Mixed Class and to add a new 5.3.8.3 to achieve this.
NTC response: While sympathetic to the concerns raised, they involve new policy issues and
further work. This issue will therefore be referred to the Transport of Dangerous Goods
Maintenance Group for consideration.
6.2.23 Vehicle placarding examples
Figure 5.3.6 of ADG7 includes a number of illustrations of vehicles transporting various packages
and placardable units to demonstrate how they should be placarded.
Issue
5.3.6.4.1 now allows emergency information panels (EIPs) on placardable units (and portable tanks
etc.) to substitute for EIPs on both the sides and the rear of a vehicle.
Enquiries are often received from industry regarding the correct placarding of vehicles transporting
IBCs.
48
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September 2013
Therefore, it is proposed to insert a new 5.3.6(g) which includes an illustration of a vehicle
transporting two IBCs, one with EIPs facing the sides and one with an EIP facing the rear. This
would demonstrate how to comply simply with 5.3.6.4.1.
Draft provision
At the end of Figure 5.3.6 insert –
(g)

Small vehicle transporting 2 IBCs of same dangerous goods with other non
dangerous goods.
o
1 IBC with ½ size EIP fully visible on one side.
o
1 IBC with ½ size EIP fully visible from rear. (No other EIP required
on those faces)
o
Full size EIP required on side where IBC placards not visible.
6.2.24 Omission of provision moved to Model Subordinate Law
Consultation comments
Clause 23 of the draft of Package No. 2 released for public comment proposed to omit 5.5.2.2 of
ADG7. One submission noted that this provision was being inserted by Schedule 4, and also noted
that it would be desirable to retain that provision even though its subject matter was now partly
dealt with in the Model Subordinate Law.
NTC response: The comment is accepted. Clause 23 has been omitted, and 5.5.2.2 as inserted by
Schedule 4 will be retained on the basis that it still has a purpose despite the Model Subordinate
Law provision.
6.2.25 Test periods for Multiple Element Gas Containers (MEGCs)
Both P200 and 6.7.5.12 of ADG7 set out inspection and testing requirements for Multiple Element
Gas Containers (MEGCs).
Issue
P200 states that the test period for certain compressed gases (for example compressed hydrogen)
is 10 years. However, 6.7.5.12.4 refers to a 5-year inspection and test. It states that this must
include an external examination of the structure, elements and service equipment, but also states
that elements and piping must be tested at the periodicity specified in packing instruction P200. It is
unclear whether this is an anomaly or whether P200 relates only to a pressure test of the elements.
However, it is sufficiently unclear to warrant further explanation.
For clarity it is proposed that “and test” be removed from 6.7.5.12.4.
Draft provision
In 6.7.5.12.4 omit "and test".
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September. 2013
49
Consultation comments
A submission suggested that while the reason for this change was understandable, given that the
current wording in 6.7.5.12.4 is taken directly from the UN Model Regulations, this change should
not be made until the UN Model Regulations are changed.
NTC response: Given the period of time it would take to have the UN Model Regulations changed,
Australian regulators are keen for the change to be made now.
6.2.26 Approval of tank vehicles
Currently 4.2.4(1) of ADG7 only provides a Competent Authority with the power to approve a
packaging design if it complies with Part 6 of ADG7, which calls up AS2809.
Issue
4.2.4(1)(a) is considered restrictive as it does not permit approval of tanker designs which involve
new technology, materials or construction techniques not yet permitted by AS2809. AS2809 was
last updated in 2009. Additionally, it does not allow for any possible discrepancies or errors in
AS2809 (such as the re-implementation of an earlier provision relating to dual axles for trailers
which omitted crucial words).
Under the draft provision, Competent Authorities are given the flexibility to approve tanker designs
not yet permitted by AS2809. To ensure this power is not extended to any type of packaging, the
provision only applies to tanker designs under 6.9.2 of ADG7.
Draft provision
After 6.9.2.1.2 insert –
"6.9.2.1.3
The Competent Authority may also approve the design of a tank that forms
part of, or is used, on a tank vehicle and that does not comply with the
relevant requirements specified in 6.9.2.1.2 if –
(a)
the application for design approval of the tank demonstrates
compliance with other criteria which are acceptable to the Competent
Authority; and
(b)
the Competent Authority is satisfied that the use of the tank will not
result in greater risk than a design that complies with the relevant
requirements specified in 6.9.2.1.2.".
6.2.27 Compliance plates
6.9.2.2 of ADG7 requires that a corrosion-resistant metal plate containing certain compliance
information be permanently attached to every tanker.
Issue
Compliance plates contain essential information for inspectors and it is important that they be
legible. Enforcement campaigns have found that there are a great number of incomplete and
illegible compliance plates on tank vehicles. This has caused ongoing problems during vehicle
inspections.
Draft provision
After 6.9.2.2.3 insert –
"6.9.2.2.4
The details required by 6.9.2.2.3 must be stamped, embossed, engraved or
otherwise permanently marked on the compliance plate.".
50
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September 2013
6.2.28 Correction of incorrect reference
The standard referred to in 6.9.2.3 of ADG7 should be AS3788.
Draft provision
In the note beneath 6.9.2.3, for "AS 3778" substitute "AS 3788".
6.2.29 Ventilation
ADG Code 7.4.5 requires transport units or compartments to be “ventilated to prevent the build up
of vapours that are likely to increase risk”
Issue
This is considered to be too subjective for operators to comply with and for inspectors to be clear
on what is or isn’t sufficient ventilation. It is also considered too imprecise to base a prosecution on.
Closed vehicles fitted only with roof vents are often found transporting flammable gases. While
these probably comply with the wording of the Code, it is not thought that these types of vents are
very effective in the case of leaking LPG cylinders, for example, based on incidents that have
occurred in relation to such vehicles. Flammable gases are known to sit in the lower parts of
transport units, and it is important that the ventilation system of a transport unit circulates air
through those lower parts.
Draft provision
At the end of 7.1.4.5 insert –
"The ventilation must produce a flow of air that circulates throughout the unit or
compartment, in particular through the highest and lowest parts of the unit or
compartment, and must provide for the air to be released from the unit or compartment
after it has circulated. However the requirements in the previous sentence do not apply
in the case of a shipping container that is being used:
(a)
to import those goods if appropriate measures are taken to check for vapours
before the container is opened, and to be able to deal, when the container is
opened, with any build up of vapours that may have occurred; and
(b)
to export those goods if the container will be accepted for carriage by sea or air
without needing to comply with those requirements.".
Consultation comments
1.
One submission strongly recommended that shipping containers used for export and
import should be exempted from the revised wording to provide for smoother transitions between
transport modes, and because risk mitigation measures are in place when such containers are
opened if they contain goods that could cause harm if they have leaked in the container during
transport. This submission reflects similar submissions that the NTC received during its preconsultation processes.
NTC response: Given what happens in practice at present, the concerns raised are reasonable,
and an exemption along the requested lines has been inserted into the draft provision.
2.
Another submission suggested that the proposed change is problematic because it
specifies outcomes that cannot be measured. It also does not specify whether it applies only when
vehicles are moving, or at all times. The submission goes on to suggest:
Rather than attempting to prescribe the type of circulation that should achieve the desired
outcome, would it not be more effective (and more easily policed) to replace it with a
statement to the effect that ventilation does not meet the requirements of this clause if at
any time during the transport cycle it may be possible to measure an atmosphere that
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September. 2013
51
exceeds 10% of the l.e.l., or an Oxygen concentration exceeding 25%, anywhere in the
unit or compartment outside a radius of, say, 50cm from any pressure receptacle that may
be leaking or otherwise discharging.
NTC response: In our view the proposed change represents an improvement on 7.1.4.5, as it
provides more certainty as to what is required. Although it does not specify an outcome that can
be measured, it does specify an outcome that can be enforced. That is, the transport unit either
has a ventilation system that is capable of moving air in the way specified, or it does not.
With respect to whether the requirement applies at all times, or only when the transport unit is
moving, in common with 7.1.4.5, the requirement applies at all times, that is, regardless of whether
the vehicle is moving or not. The restriction of the requirement to moving transport units can only
be achieved by explicitly providing for it.
As for the suggested change to provide a measurable outcome, the suggestion will be referred to
the Transport of Dangerous Goods Maintenance Group for consideration. It may well represent an
even further level of improvement for 7.1.4.5, but it involves consideration of new policy issues.
3.
One submission recommended that the UN definition of enclosed vehicle be adopted, so
that "curtain sided vehicles" would not be considered to be an enclosed vehicle.
NTC response: As this involves a new policy issue, it will be referred to the Transport of Dangerous
Goods Maintenance Group for consideration.
6.2.30 Correction of error – 7.1.5.1
7.1.5.1 of ADG7 should refer to overpack, rather than unit load.
Draft provision
In 7.1.5.1, for "unit load" substitute "overpack".
Consultation comments
It was submitted that the error being corrected here is also an error in the UN Model Regulations,
and should therefore only be fixed when the UN Model Regulations also fix the error. It was also
noted that the term "unit load" also appears elsewhere in ADG7.
NTC response: Given the period of time it would take to have the UN Model Regulations changed,
Australian regulators are keen for the change to be made now. This is the only instance raised
where the change is sought.
6.2.31 Condition of restraint devices
8.1.2 of ADG7 sets out a number of requirements for stowage and restraint, including the use of
sufficiently strong transport units, undamaged transport unit interiors and exteriors, and restraining
by suitable means.
Issue
Vehicle inspections have revealed the use in some instances of restraint devices that are
damaged, defective or in poor condition. While this is considered a safety risk, there is currently no
specific requirement in ADG7 that has been breached. This is considered a regulatory gap for
enforcement purposes. The draft provision is designed to remedy that situation.
Draft provision
After 8.1.2.10 insert –
"8.1.2.11
Any thing used to restrain another thing for the purposes of this Chapter ("the
device") must be in good condition, and must be free from any defect that
might lessen the ability of the device to achieve its function.".
52
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September 2013
6.2.32 Segregation of certain explosives – 1.4S
9.1.2.2.2 of ADG7 states:
Issue
The intention was that 1.4S is compatible with other dangerous goods where less than a placard
load is transported. The current wording does not reflect the fact that a placard load may be
250kg(L) if there is any flammable gas, toxic gas or packing group 1 substance in the load.
For clarity and consistency 9.1.2.2.2 should be amended.
Draft provision
In 9.1.2.2.2, for "does not exceed 1000 kg(L)" substitute "is less than a placard load".
Consultation comments
A submission was made stating:
While this change would appear to be logical, it is a change from a very longstanding
decision that was examined several times over the years by ACTDG and always the
decision was to leave it at 1000. Has there been some incident that warrants a change
now, or is it just a perceived problem?
NTC response: We have relied on the advice of regulators that this change is desirable.
6.2.33 Separation of dangerous goods on rail vehicles
An exemption (CA2009/152) has been granted by the Competent Authorities Panel that provides
an exemption from the requirement to be separated by 15 intervening load platforms when
transporting nominally empty rail vehicles of dangerous goods, Cyanide and Acid, provided the
nominally empty rail vehicles still comply with the ADG7 prescribed separation distance of at least
two load platforms. As this is an exemption that should apply generally, the draft provision
replicates it in ADG7.
Draft provision
In 9.2.3, in the Restrictions set out under Table 9.3, at the end of restriction e insert –
"However, if all of the receptacles in or on a freight container or wagon transporting
such Cyanide, or such Acid, or both, are nominally empty, it is only necessary that
the container or wagon be separated by at least 2 such intervening load
platforms.".
Consultation comments
The following submission was made:
This makes sense. But it is very verbose. And it confuses what is currently a container or
wagon separation issue with one of individual receptacles, leaving it to the reader to
determine what to do if a wagon has a mixture of full and empty receptacles. Can I suggest
that rather than add a new paragraph, just append the following to the existing e.
…except where all of the receptacles in the unit transporting either Cyanide or Acid
(or both of them) are nominally empty, when 2 intervening load platforms will
suffice.
NTC response: It is agreed that the wording of the provision could be improved to deal with the
primary concern raised. A slightly different approach has been adopted to the one suggested
however.
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September. 2013
53
6.2.34 Hydrostatic pressure testing of hoses
10.1.3.3 of ADG7 sets out testing requirements for hose assemblies as follows:
Issue
There have been a number of different interpretations of 10.1.3.3 of ADG7 from the various
Competent Authorities regarding when a hose assembly should be tested.
The draft provision aims to provide more certainty in this area.
Draft provision
In 10.1.3.3, for paragraphs (a) and (b) substitute –
"(a)
not more than 12 months before its initial use; and
(b)
thereafter at the intervals required by the relevant standard, or, otherwise, on or
before each anniversary of its first use.".
Consultation comments
A submission was made that by inference 10.1.3.3 applies to both suction and pressure hoses, and
that pressure testing should only be required for hoses that are subject to pressure, that is pump
out-let hoses. An alternative approach was also suggested.
NTC response: The submission raises new policy issues and will be referred to the Transport of
Dangerous Goods Maintenance Group for consideration.
6.2.35 Transfer of bitumen
An exemption (CA2010/44) has been granted by the Competent Authorities Panel that permits the
transfer of bitumen to road-making equipment where the vehicles are coupled together and
moving. As this is an exemption that should apply generally, the draft provision replicates it in
ADG7.
Draft provision
After 10.2.3.6 insert –
"10.2.3.7
Despite 10.2.3.1 and 10.2.3.3, if a bitumen tank vehicle is coupled with
road making plant, bitumen may be transferred between the vehicles by
a connecting hose while the vehicles are in motion and while the cabins
are occupied. However the tank vehicle drive away protection system
may only be overridden when coupled to the road making plant.".
6.2.36 Ullage – requirements to also apply to other liquids
See section 6.1.12
54
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September 2013
6.2.37 Ullage requirements for vacuum tankers
An exemption (CA2006/26) has been granted by the Competent Authorities Panel that provides an
exemption from ullage requirements for vacuum tankers transporting waste dangerous goods. As
this is an exemption that should apply generally, the draft provision replicates it in ADG7.
Draft provision
(2)
In 10.3.1.2.2, after "(UN 3256 and 3257)" insert ", or to waste dangerous goods
transported in vacuum tank vehicles".
6.2.38 Mass fill ratio for tank vehicles > 5000L capacity
An exemption (CA2011/121) has been granted by the Competent Authorities Panel that allows a
mass fill ration of 0.45 for tank vehicles with a capacity greater than 5000L. As this is an exemption
that should apply generally, the draft provision replicates it in ADG7.
Draft provision
In 10.3.2.1, for paragraphs (a) and (b) substitute –
"(a)
for goods covered under AS/NZS 1596, as specified in the filling instructions
set out in that Standard;
(b)
for tank vehicles with a capacity of 5000L or more transporting propane,
0.45, as determined in accordance with Table 2.1 of AS 2809.3;
(c)
in all other circumstances, the relevant ratio specified in Portable Tank
Instruction T50 in Chapter 4.2;
(d)
if paragraph (c) applies but no ratio is specified in Portable Tank Instruction
T50 – the ratio determined by a Competent Authority in relation to goods of
that type when transferred into a tank of that type.".
6.2.39 Correction of anomaly concerning special documentation
This provision corrects an error discovered in Part 11 concerning documentation.
Draft provision
In 11.1.3.1.1, for "proper shipping name" substitute "dangerous goods description
specified in 11.1.2.2.1 (a) to (e)".
6.2.40 Form of road transport documentation
See section 6.1.13
6.2.41 Fire extinguishers
(a)
Inspection and testing
12.1.2.3 of ADG7 currently requires that fire extinguishers comply with the general requirements for
portable fire extinguishers under AS/NZS1841.1 and with requirements for classification, rating and
performance testing under AS/NZS1850.
Issue
ADG6 also referenced the current Australian standard for the maintenance of fire protection
equipment (AS1851-2005). This is not referenced under ADG7. As a result, ADG7 no longer calls
up a maintenance schedule for fire extinguishers on dangerous goods vehicles.
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September. 2013
55
At present, regulators can only check that the appropriate fire extinguishers are fitted and charged,
as having an out-of-date extinguisher, or an extinguisher with no maintenance tag at all, is no
longer a breach of ADG7 requirements.
The draft provision adds references to the Standards requiring maintenance to 12.1.2.3(a). There
will consequently be an enforceable requirement for fire extinguishers to comply with maintenance
schedules.
(b)
Compliance with Standards
12.1.2.3(b) of ADG7 refers to various parts of AS/NZS 1841 which a fire extinguisher must comply
with.
Issue
AS/NZS 1841.6 and 1841.7 relate to carbon dioxide type and vaporising liquid type fire
extinguishers. However, Table 12.1 in ADG7 only requires dry powder and foam type extinguishers
to be carried when transporting dangerous goods. References to Parts 6 and 7 are, therefore,
irrelevant. The draft provision therefore removes them.
(c)
Location of fire extinguishers
Chapter 12.1 of ADG7 sets out the number of fire extinguishers required on a vehicle and where
extinguishers should be located.
Issue
There have been numerous requests from industry for clarification of the fire extinguisher location
requirements. Table 12.1 uses the terms near driver’s door and cabin to describe the required
th
location. These terms are vague. There was agreement at the 34 Competent Authorities Panel
meeting on how these terms should be interpreted (that is, that near driver’s door can mean “in the
cabin or directly behind the cabin” and cabin can mean “in the cabin or mounted on the rear of the
cabin”), and the draft provision gives effect to that agreement.
In addition, there is a contradiction between 12.1.2.2 and 12.1.2.5.4 of ADG7. In the case of a BDouble with only an IBC on the rear trailer, 12.1.2.2 would require a 30Bextinguisher on the rear
trailer.12.1.2.5.4 (where practicable) and Table 12.1 would require it to be near the driver’s door.
Draft provision
(1)
For 12.1.2.3(a) substitute –
"(a)
AS/NZS 1841.1, AS/NZS 1850 and AS1851; and".
(2)
In 12.1.2.3(b), for "5, 6 or 7" substitute "or 5".
(3)
In 12.1.2.5.4, for "Where" substitute ""Except in the case of a combination vehicle,
if".
(4)
For 12.1.2.5.4(b) substitute –
"(b)
(5)
in the cabin for all other vehicles.".
After 12.1.2.5.4 insert –
"12.1.2.5.5
If 12.1.2.5.4 or Table 12.1 requires that a fire extinguisher be
located in the cabin, as an alternative to being located in the cabin the fire
extinguisher may be located directly behind the cabin or may be mounted on
the rear of the cabin.".
(6)
56
For Table 12.1 substitute –
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September 2013
"Table 12.1
Minimum Fire Extinguisher Requirements for Road Vehicles Transporting a
Placard Load of Dangerous Goods
Load:
All types of dangerous goods packed in:
• packages, drums, overpacks, segregation devices
• intermediate bulk containers (IBCs) containing non-flammables – any quantity
• IBCs containing flammables with up to (and including) 10,000 L capacity or containing up to
(and including) 10,000 kg.
Required extinguishers:
1 x 30B dry powder that is to be placed in the cabin (see 12.1.2.5.5), or at the front of any trailer
transporting a placard load
Load:
Non-flammable goods packed in:
•
•
•
•
•
pressure drums
tubes
multiple element gas containers (MEGCs)
tanks
bulk containers (solids).
Required extinguishers:
1 x 60B dry powder or 2 x 30B dry powder in the load area
1 x 10B dry powder in the cabin (see 12.1.2.5.5)
Load:
Flammable goods packed in:
• pressure drums, tubes, MEGCs, tanks, bulk containers (solids)
• IBCs > 10,000 L capacity or containing >10,000 kg.
Required extinguishers:
2 × 60B dry powder, or 1x 80B dry powder and 1 x 20B foam, in the load area
1 x 10B dry powder in the cabin (see 12.1.2.5.5)
Note 1: In this table "flammable goods" means dangerous goods of Division 2.1, Class 3 or Class
4, or having a subsidiary risk of 2.1, 3 or 4.
Note 2: In cases of combination vehicles, these directions apply to every separate trailer
transporting a placard load.".
Consultation comments
A suggestion was made that where there is a requirement that fire extinguishers be kept in a
vehicle cabin, there should be a further requirement that they be secured to minimise the risk of
items striking the driver in the event of an accident.
NTC response: As this represents new policy, it will be referred to the Transport of Dangerous
Goods Maintenance Group for consideration.
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September. 2013
57
6.2.42 Parking requirements and fatigue laws
Issue
13.1.3.2.2.2 of ADG7 currently states that parking requirements do not apply if the driver is
required to comply with any other law. The intention of this clause was to capture emergency
situations where other legislation should take priority. However, it has been noted by regulators that
in some instances fatigue laws are being used to justify not complying with dangerous goods
parking requirement. This is not in line with the clause’s intention. The draft provision is intended to
clarify this situation.
Draft provision
(1)
In 13.1.3.2.2.2(a)(iv), after "any law" insert ", other than a law regulating driver
fatigue".
Consultation comments
1.
A comment was received that this provision "creates a situation that if a driver arrives for a
long fatigue break at a pretty full and/or small parking bay for a long rest, and cannot park in a
place that is greater than 8 metres away from another placarded load, they would be in breach of
this proposed law or risk breaching fatigue laws by travelling to the next safest parking bay".
NTC response: The situation described would create an unintended effect, and also raises several
other issues. This proposed change has been omitted, and will be referred to the Transport of
Dangerous Goods Maintenance Group for further consideration.
2.
Another comment was received in relation to the paragraph being amended by this draft
provision suggesting that the paragraph itself was too wide.
NTC response: This comment will also be referred to the Transport of Dangerous Goods
Maintenance Group for consideration at the same time as the previous comment.
3.
Another submission suggested that there are practical limitations to separation distances in
public laybys and rest areas.
NTC response: The current provisions are based on the UN Model Regulations, so will not easily
be changed.
6.2.43 Parking exemptions
An exemption (CA2009/171) has been granted by the Competent Authorities Panel that allows
placarded vehicles containing vehicle batteries (UN 2794) to park in public places and residential
areas if certain requirements are met. As this is an exemption that should apply generally, the draft
provision replicates it in ADG7.
Additionally, the proposed new ADG7 clause 13.1.3.2.2.4 will mean that the 8-metre minimum
separation parking/standing distance that must be kept between road vehicles transporting
dangerous goods and vehicles transporting placard loads will not apply in areas to which the public
does not have access (such as controlled sites).
Draft provision
(2)
After 13.1.3.2.2.3 insert –
"13.1.3.2.2.4 13.1.3.2.2.1(d) does not apply to a road vehicle transporting dangerous
goods that is parked or left standing in an area to which there is no
public access.
13.1.3.2.2.5 Despite 13.1.3.2.2.1, a vehicle carrying BATTERIES, WET, FILLED
WITH ACID, electric storage (UN 2794) of Packing Group III that each
have a gross mass of 65kg or less, and that together have a gross mass
of 5000kg or less, may:
58
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September 2013
(a)
park in a public place if:
(i)
in the case of an enclosed vehicle, the load area is locked; or
(ii)
in the case of a tray-sided vehicle, the load is covered, or the
vehicle is supervised; and
(b)
be garaged in a residential area if:
(i)
in the case of an enclosed vehicle, the load area is locked; or
(ii)
in the case of a tray-sided vehicle, the garage is locked.
13.1.3.2.2.6 However, 13.1.3.2.2.5 only applies if the transport documentation for the
load states the number of batteries in the load, and if that number is
adjusted after each delivery so that it accurately states the number of
batteries in the load at all times.".
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September. 2013
59
7. Consultation
7.1 Overview
Fairly extensive consultation occurred with industry and government in the initial creation of
Amendment Package No. 2. In particular:
•
the UN16 and UN17 amendments (Schedule 4 of Amendment Package No. 2) were
circulated to the industry members on the NTC’s Maintenance Team’s email circulation
list and to the Competent Authorities for comment in late 2011
•
the Maintenance Amendments (Schedules 1, 2 and 3 of Amendment Package No. 2)
were circulated to those industry members in late 2012 and early to mid-2013.
The initial version of this paper and Amendment Package No. 2 were released for public
consultation on 6 August 2013. The period for submissions ended on 2 September 2013. In all, 16
submissions were received: 1 from government; 14 from industry groups and individual companies;
and 1 from a consultant commissioned by the NTC. A list of those who made submissions is set
out in section 7.2.
Some submissions were made on particular clauses in Amendment Package No. 2, while other
submissions addressed more general issues. The submissions on particular clauses are described
in Part 6 underneath the explanation for the particular clause in that Part. The description of the
submission also includes the NTC's response to the submission. A number of changes were made
to Amendment Package No. 2 as a result of the submissions that were made.
A description of the more general issues raised in the submissions is set out in section 7.3.
Some submissions were also received in relation to the amendments proposed in Schedule 4 of
Amendment Package No. 2. Schedule 4 sets out amendments that are based on the UN16 and
UN17 amendments to the UN Model Regulations. A description of those submissions, and the
NTC response to them, is set out in section 7.4.
7.2 Who made submissions
Submissions were received from the following organisations in response to the publication of the
consultation drafts of this paper and Amendment Package No. 2:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
60
ACCORD
Australasian Fire and Emergency Service Authorities Council (AFAC)
Australia New Zealand Industrial Gas Association
Australian Explosives Industry and Safety Group Inc
Australian Logistics Council
Australian Trucking Association
BioLab
Department of Mines and Petroleum Resources Safety, Government of Western Australia
Gas Energy Australia
McColl’s Transport
Noel Arnold & Associates Pty Ltd
Plastics And Chemicals Industries Association (PACIA)
Road to Safety Pty Limited
Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers’ Institute, Inc
Shipping Australia Limited
Winchester Australia
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September 2013
7.3 General issues raised
Regulatory framework
At least 2 submissions suggested that it was time to revisit the general regulatory framework for the
transport of dangerous goods. It should be noted that the NTC has just finished a review of that
very issue. One submission suggested that transport of dangerous goods laws in Australia should
be based on an applied law regime. Another submission suggested that those laws should largely
adopt by reference the UN Model Regulations.
As these are matters beyond the scope of Amendment Package No. 2, no further comment will be
made here in relation to them in this paper.
Limited quantities
Several submissions regretted the fact that Amendment Package No. 2 does not adopt all of the
changes made with respect to the transport of limited quantities by the UN16 and UN17
amendments. It was notable that a number of submissions on this theme came from companies
involved in the import of small arms ammunition.
As has been mentioned elsewhere in this paper, work will occur for intended Amendment Package
No. 3 with a view to bringing the Australian and UN positions on limited quantities into closer
alignment.
Inner packaging requirements
A number of submissions urged that the Australia-unique requirements in relation to the marking of
inner packaging be removed from ADG7.
The NTC will again raise this issue with Australian regulators.
Retail distribution loads
One submission suggested that the provisions in ADG7 concerning retail distribution loads could
be significantly improved. In fact, the author of the submission had previously submitted a specific
proposal in this regard to the NTC, and the proposal had been forwarded to the Transport of
Dangerous Goods Maintenance Group for consideration. However, this proposal was only put to
the Group recently, so the Group was not able to provide feedback on the proposal in time for it to
be considered for inclusion in Amendment Package No. 2. The NTC will place this issue on the
agenda of the next Group meeting, which is scheduled to be held in mid-November 2013.
Stronger industry involvement in the Maintenance Group
Two submissions strongly urged that there be industry representation on the Transport of
Dangerous Goods Maintenance Group. Although this is an issue that is beyond the scope of
Amendment Package No. 2, the NTC supports the general principle behind these submissions, and
will work with the Maintenance Group to attempt to find a practicable way for industry
representation to occur.
Australian Standards
One submission noted that many of the Australian Standards referred to in dangerous goods laws
are infrequently reviewed and are out of line with international practice, to the cost of Australian
industry. It was suggested that a review should occur in consultation with industry as to the
applicability of the Standards and whether they could be replaced by international standards.
Again this is an issue that is beyond the scope of Amendment Package No. 2, but is worthy of
further consideration. Another submission that was aware of this submission also supported this
submission.
Australia-wide repository of industry-wide CAP decisions
One submission noted various problems that existed in ascertaining the terms of exemptions
granted by the Competent Authorities Panel and other decisions of that Panel that were relevant to
someone other than the applicant. This submission will be referred to the Panel for advice and
action.
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September. 2013
61
Provide for transport documents to be stored externally to a vehicle
One submission asked that consideration be given to amending transport of dangerous goods laws
to enable a system that would allow:
•
•
•
•
The operator to create an electronic manifest of all bulk and packaged dangerous goods
that is relevant to each rigid truck or trailer. This manifest would also offer a load plan
for the placement of each dangerous goods type, and show the segregation devices
used.
The electronic manifest would be uploaded to a common website, and allocate a unique
manifest number.
A simple flip over sign at the front and rear of vehicle combination could be used to
denote that online capture of an electronic dangerous goods manifest to match the load
is available.
In the event of an accident, the attending emergency service would be able to access
the manifest and loading plan through an App driven application or PC/Internet
connection.
A simple diamond on the number plate of each piece of equipment can be used (the same
as an LPG sticker) to alert the emergency services that the operator is compliant with the
dangerous Goods Module, and to check for the availability of online details for the load.
This change to the dangerous goods legislation would give the emergency service the
ability to proactively plan the recovery at an accident site before they leave their building,
instead of reacting to an unknown situation when they arrive at the scene of the accident.
This in itself improves safety for the emergency services personnel as well as reducing the
cost seen with over planning emergency responses.
The submission suggested that work to achieve this be done in conjunction with Transport
Certification Australia and the regulators. There seems to be considerable merit in this submission,
and it raises ideas that are well worth pursuing. The NTC will consider this in developing its future
work program.
A compliance module should be developed concerning the correct handling of DG paperwork
The same submission also suggested that a Dangerous Goods Management module should be
developed under the National Heavy Vehicle Accreditation Scheme concerning the correct
handling of paperwork associated with the transport of dangerous goods. The submission goes on
to detail a list of the things the module should cover.
Again, there seems to be considerable merit in this submission, and again it raises ideas that
should be pursued. The NTC will consider this in developing its future work program.
Clarification of the provisions of ADG7 concerning Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus
One submission suggested that the provisions of ADG7 that were unclear in relation to when SelfContained Breathing Apparatus should be used in relation to Class 8 dangerous goods, and
possibly inconsistent with the way certain Class dangerous goods were treated. This matter will be
referred to the Transport of Dangerous Goods Maintenance Group for consideration.
Inclusion of exemption concerning manifolded gas cylinders
One submission noted that although this paper states that Amendment Package No. 2 enshrines
exemptions granted by the Competent Authorities Panel that should have general permanent
application, that Package does not include CAP exemption VCAP-01-DET CA 2012-12, which
relates to manifolded gas cylinders.
It was originally intended to have that exemption in Package No. 2, and provisions based on that
exemption were included in a preliminary version of Package No. 2 that was put out for informal
consultation. However feedback from that consultation indicated that there were significant
concerns with aspects of the provisions. Unfortunately there was insufficient time to resolve those
concerns before Package No. 2 had to be finalised. A decision was therefore taken to defer the
provisions to Package No. 3 to allow further work and consultation on them to occur.
62
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September 2013
Issues relating to CAP
One submission was concerned to ensure that the Competent Authorities Panel was properly
resourced to ensure that CAP could carry out its functions in a timely manner. It also urged that
CAP be made responsible to an appropriate body, and stated that the lack of governance of this
group was an ongoing concern. It also urged that determinations made by CAP should eventually
be codified.
The first two of these issues are well out of the scope of Package No. 2 and are matters for
ministers. With respect to the second issue, it is unclear what body exists that could be used to
oversight CAP. The third issue refers to something that is likely to occur. Package No. 2 codifies a
number of CAP exemptions, and a CAP determination. This practice is likely to continue in future.
Recognition of mobile processing units
A submission was received that advocated that mobile processing units that are used to mix
explosives on mining and construction sites should be explicitly recognised in ADG7 to assist in
resolving problems that occur when it comes to determining the compatibility of the dangerous
goods that can be carried by the units when they are being moved between sites.
This issue has not previously been brought to the attention of the NTC, so it was not possible to
examine it for the purposes of Package No. 2. The issue will be referred to the Transport of
Dangerous Goods Maintenance Group for consideration for inclusion in a future package.
Special segregation provisions
A submission was received concerning certain specified problems with Table 9.3 in ADG7. This
table deals with restricted loads on certain vehicles. As the problems mentioned have not
previously been brought to the attention of the NTC, it was not possible to examine them for the
purposes of Package No. 2. They will be referred to the Transport of Dangerous Goods
Maintenance Group for consideration for inclusion in a future package.
7.4 Issues raised in relation to Schedule 4 (UN16/UN17 ADG7 changes)
Dangerous Goods List (Part 3)
Concern was expressed that the additional calcium hypochlorite entries in the Dangerous Goods
List will create confusion unless further explanatory material is provided. On the other hand
another submission "fully supported" the inclusion of these entries.
NTC response: The NTC is not in a position to be able to provide further explanatory material in
relation to these entries, but will refer this issue to the Transport of Dangerous Goods Maintenance
Group for consideration.
GMMOs and GMOs
A submission noted that the proposed new section 2.9.2 (genetically modified micro-organisms
(GMMOs) and genetically modified organisms (GMOs)) would exclude an Australian-specific
provision (2.9.2.2) if it went ahead in its proposed form.
NTC response: That would be an unintended result, so the amending provisions have been
modified to prevent that from happening.
Limited quantities – Overpacks
A submission noted that proposed 3.4.11 was not subject to the same exclusion that the identical
5.1.2.1.1 was subject to, and that given that the latter dealt with larger packages, the omission
seemed to be an oversight.
NTC response: Agree. An equivalent to 5.1.2.1.2 (the exclusion) has been added to Chapter 3.4.
SP123
A submission noted that the way SP123 was dealt with was inconsistent with the similar SP117.
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September. 2013
63
NTC response: Agree. The wording of SP123 has been amended.
P203
One submission believed it was inappropriate to require that certain listed information be
"permanently affixed e.g. by stamping" to open cryogenic receptacles. Instead, it was suggested
that the requirement to stamp was inappropriate, and that the requirement should be that the
information "should be 'permanently attached' and how this is done is at the discretion of the
supplier and manufacturer".
NTC response: It is unclear whether any change is needed, as it appears that what is sought could
well be achieved under the wording of the proposed new provision. The new provision only
requires that the information be "permanently affixed". Stamping is given as an example of this –
contrary to what the submission states, it is not specified as a requirement. There is no reason to
think that other forms of permanent attachment cannot be used to fulfil the requirement.
P004
A submission noted that the numbering at the top of the table had gone awry.
NTC response: Agree. The errant numbers have been removed.
Chapter 5.2
1.
One submission noted that that there could be inconsistencies between proposed new
5.2.1.2 and Table 5.2.
NTC response: Agree. A provision has been inserted to provide that Table 2 prevails if there is an
inconsistency.
2.
Another submission noted that an additional transitional provision existed in relation to
particular cylinders under the IMDG (the Code regulating the international maritime transport of
dangerous goods) that it would be desirable to also have apply under ADG7.
NTC response: Agree. A note has been added to reflect the shipping transitional provision.
Restraining flexible bulk containers
A submission noted that the provisions that it was intended to insert into Chapter 7 in relation to
restraining flexible bulk containers were more appropriately placed in Chapter 8, as the provisions
are stowage requirements.
NTC response: Agree. The provisions will now be inserted into Chapter 8.
64
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September 2013
8. Implementation plan
To fully implement Amendment Package No. 2 ("Package No. 2"), amendments will be required to
the following documents:
•
to implement the Schedule 1 amendment: the law of each jurisdiction that is modelled on the
provisions of the Model Law on the Transport of Dangerous Goods by Road or Rail 2007;
•
to implement the Schedule 2 amendments: the law of each jurisdiction that is modelled on the
provisions of the Model Subordinate Law on the Transport of Dangerous Goods by Road or
Rail 2007;
•
to implement the Schedule 3 and 4 amendments: ADG7.
Amendment to primary law
The first set of documents are all an Act of Parliament in each jurisdiction. The amendment
required to these documents is of a very minor nature, does not affect any other amendment in
Package No. 2, does not affect industry, and would not generally justify a stand-alone amending
Act. In practice the amendment will only be made once a suitable statutory vehicle comes along to
which it can be attached, that being either a set of other amendments to the same Act, or an
appropriate omnibus or statutory law revision Act. It is therefore inappropriate, and would be fairly
pointless, to attempt to specify a date by which the amendment should be made.
Amendment to subordinate law
The second set of documents are each a set of regulations in each jurisdiction. Although all but
one of the amendments that need to be made to these documents are independent of the
amendments to ADG7, that exception is of some significance, as it relates to the change of name
of "transport units" to "cargo transport units", which is a concept that makes a number of
appearances in ADG7.
As it is highly desirable that the regulations concerning cargo transport units be made by the time
the Package No. 2 changes to ADG7 take effect, it was agreed at the May 2013 meeting of the
Transport of Dangerous Goods Maintenance Group that the implementation of the ADG7 changes
should be delayed to 1 July 2014 to provide jurisdictions with sufficient time to make those
regulations.
Advice has been received at officer-level from all jurisdictions other than the Northern Territory and
Tasmania that, in the light of the relevant circumstances as they stand in early September 2013,
regulations that give effect to the Package No. 2 MSL changes can and will be made by
1 July 2014.
Amendment to ADG7
In jurisdictions that have fully adopted the definition of "ADG Code" in the Model Subordinate Law
on the Transport of Dangerous Goods by Road or Rail 2007, the changes to ADG7 made by
Package No. 2 will occur automatically on the date Package No. 2 specifies as being the
commencement date of those changes. That date is 1 July 2014.
However, in the other jurisdictions, namely Queensland, South Australia and Western Australia, the
Package No. 2 changes will only be incorporated into their version of ADG7 once regulations are
made that achieve that result. Advice has been received at officer-level from each of those
jurisdictions that, in the light of the relevant circumstances as they stand in early September 2013,
regulations that give effect to the Package No. 2 ADG7 changes can and will be made by
1 July 2014. It is noted that it is expected that the same set of regulations in each jurisdiction will
be used to give effect to the Package No. 2 MSL and ADG7 changes.
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September. 2013
65
It should also be noted that the 1 July 2014 date referred to above is the date of the start of the
transition period for the Package No. 2 ADG7 changes. Full compliance with those changes will
only be required from 1 July 2015.
It should be further noted that some individual changes in the Package No. 2 ADG7 changes
provide for a longer transition period than the 12 month period that otherwise applies. Those
longer periods are based on periods specified in the UN Model Regulations.
66
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September 2013
9. References
Australian Bureau of Statistics (2001). Freight Movements. Canberra: ABS, Catalogue No. 9220.0.
Available online:
http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/[email protected]/Lookup/9220.0Main+Features1Mar%202001%20(Rei
ssue)
Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Economics (BITRE) (2013). Road Deaths
Australia 2012 Statistical Summary, BITRE, Canberra ACT. Available online:
http://www.bitre.gov.au/publications/2013/files/RDA_Summary_2012_June.pdf
Council of Australian Governments (2007). Best Practice Regulation: A Guide for Ministerial
Councils and National Standard Setting Bodies. Available online:
http://www.finance.gov.au/obpr/docs/COAG_best_practice_guide_2007.pdf
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (2005). Hazardous Materials Serious Crash Analysis:
Phase 2, Final Report, US Department of Transportation. Available online:
http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/safety-security/hazmat/Hazardous-Materials-Serious-Crash-AnalysisPhase2-April2005.pdf
th
National Transport Commission (2006). Australian Dangerous Goods Code 7 Edition Regulatory
Impact Statement, November 2006. Melbourne. ISBN 1 921168 48 X.
Plastics and Chemical Industry Association (PACIA) (2002). 2002 Health and Safety Report –
Chemicals Sector. Available online:
http://www.pacia.org.au/reports/healthandsafetysurveychemicalsarchive
Plastics and Chemical Industry Association (PACIA) (2006). 2006 Health and Safety Report –
Chemicals Sector. Available online:
http://www.pacia.org.au/reports/healthandsafetysurveychemicalsarchive
Explanation of Transport of Dangerous Goods Laws Amendment Package No. 2 September. 2013
67