The International Air Transport Association (IATA), has recently published a summary of changes that will be seen in the 2012 edition of the IATA Dangerous Goods Regulations (DGR).
 
Some rather extensive changes to aspects such as packaging have been introduced this year in the DGR 52^nd edition. The changes for the 53^rd edition, that will take effect January 1, 2012 will be more limited, and are designed in most cases to refine or simplify requirements, rather than create new ones or change requirements significantly.
 
The expected changes include:
 

• Provisions for limited quantity packaging will be consolidated in section 2.7.5, moving some information from its current location section 5.0.
• Special provision A44 has been revised to clarify compatibility and packing group requirements for chemical and first aid kits.
• Special provision A802 has been created, to require that entries to the List of Dangerous Goods without packing groups, but with a requirement for UN specification packaging, must use packaging rated at least to the Packing Group II level.
• Special Provision A803 will require that all corrosives in Class 8, Packing Group III be packed in packaging that meets at least Packing Group II standards.(except for limited quantities).
• Special Provision A804 will reaffirm that Gallium and Mercury must be shipped in packaging that meets Packing Group I standards.
• Special Provision A805 will clarify that Dry ice may be packed directly into an overpack without an intervening packaging.
• For lithium metal and lithium ion batteries, additional notes have been added regarding testing requirements for refurbished or otherwise altered batteries. Clarification has been added for carrying lithium batteries as passenger baggage when they are subject to the sections of Section II of the relevant packing instructions.
• The requirements for marking overpacks have been clarified to show specifically which markings must be reproduced on the outside of the overpack when not visible through the overpack.
• The method of describing multiple overpacks on the Shipper’s Declaration for Dangerous Goods has been expanded on, to align with the markings requirements for overpacks.
• The provisions for information that must be provided on the air waybill or dangerous goods that do not require Shipper’s Declarations (such as Dry ice and Magnetized materials) has been revised
• Appendix H will include a summary of the regulatory changes that will be expected to come into effect on January 1, 2013 for the 54^th Edition of the DGR.

 
If you have any questions regarding this document, or shipping dangerous goods by air in general, please contact ICC Compliance Center Inc at 1-888-442-9628 (USA) or 1-888-977-4834 (Canada).

As we approach the start of another new year, we also approach the start of new regulatory requirements. Both the IATA Dangerous Goods Regulations and the IMDG Code have new editions for 2011. The IATA regulations go into effect on January 1, while the IMDG Code has a 1 year transition period before becoming mandatory. If you ship using either of these regulations, you must ask yourself “Am I ready?”

IATA has made significant changes for 2011, and as a regulatory specialist, I am expecting A LOT of panicked phone calls from shippers (and carriers) who were unaware of the changes. In addition to the typical minor changes that happen on a yearly basis, IATA has completely revamped the limited quantity requirements as well as the packing instructions in section 5. The limited quantity requirements even have a new section number assigned to them. I can’t even begin to imagine how much confusion there is going to be with the new packing instructions!

The IMDG Code changes are not as drastic as IATA’s, but that doesn’t mean there won’t be questions. The limited quantity changes have made their way into the IMDG Code, so people who deal with those shipments are going to have to brush up on both regulations.

If you haven’t already checked out the new regulations, make sure that you do so as soon as possible. And don’t forget, if you do run into any problems or questions with any regulatory requirements, you can give us a call and we will help you out.

IATA has published the list of significant changes to the 52nd Edition of the IATA Dangerous Goods Regulations.

Here are some of the changes:

Under Section 1.3, Shipper’s Responsibilities, there is a mandatory requirement to retain a copy of the Shipper’s Declaration for a minimum period of 3 months.

For dangerous goods in Limited Quantities, the provisions have been revised. A new marking has been adopted and text is no longer required on the Shipper’s Declaration.

Amendments to the List of Dangerous Goods include the adoption of new packing instruction numbers for all substances in classes 3, 4, 5, 8 and 9 and dividion 6.1, new UN numbers entries and a significant number of generic and n.o.s. proper shipping names now require the addition of the technical name.

Changes to special provisons and new special provisions.

Changes to general packing requirements include new requirements for closures for inner packagings for liquids. Now requires a secondary means of maintaining the closure. In the absence of secondary means, the inner packaging(s) must be placed in a leakproof liner. Provisions for absorbent material in paragraph 5.0.12.2 and for liners in 5.0.12.3 have been deleted. When such requirements exists they have now been placed directly in the applicable packing instructions as Additional Packing Requirements.

All of the reformatted packing instructions included in Appendix H in the 51st Edition have now been incorporated into the body of the Regulations. There is a three-month transition period to allow for packages prepared for transport before December 31, 2010 using packing instructions in the 51st Edition to be presented for transport until March 31, 2011.

In the regulatory world, things are not always as clear as they seem at first glance. One example of this is the use of the words must, may, shall and should. They seem pretty straightforward, but if interpreted incorrectly, they could lead you down the road of non-compliance, or leave you scrambling to comply with something that is not actually required.

Continue reading »