Hi, 

Part of the business I work for has a large outdoor storage facility containing all different sizes of containers and Portable tanks. There are 100's of containers / tanks arriving and leaving every day most of the content is non-hazardous (anything from tinned foods to shoes anything you will see in a shop), however there are occasions when dangerous goods (DG’s) arrive onto site, when this happens the driver will have to produce a dangerous goods note which will have a UN number (a unique reference), from that UN number it’s possible to work out what the product is.

Some of these DG’s can’t be deemed as still in transit as they can be stored for months at a time (If in transit COMAH doesn’t apply)

When looking at schedule 1 of COMAH Table A it categorise dangerous substances into groups such as H2 toxic, P5c flammable liquid, P7 Pyrophoric etc...

This information is never provided when a Dangerous Goods arrives onto site, the only requirement from ADR (Agreement concerning the international carriage of dangerous goods by road) is that there is a Dangerous Goods note is provided.

I've had a go of using the UN number to determine the product then manually look up a SDS and then try and workout whether the product can be described as H2, P5c, P7 etc... It's not that easy to do sometimes I can’t find this information on SDS. Should the COMAH category information always be on a SDS? Under REACH should the consignor predetermine the category prior to asking us to store the goods?

I’m trying to find a system that will automatically tell us (live data) the inventory of our DG’s so that we never creep into COMAH territory and can turn work away.

 Any help appreciated

Safety Data Sheets only need transport information in Section 14 - ADR/IMDG/IATA/AND - when appropriate which is your UN number, proper shipping name and packaging.

Some do make reference to the SEVESO Directive (not all) generally in Section 15 however this was enacted in the UK as COMAH so there is often no direct correlation.

Ideally you need Section 2 of the Safety Data Sheet as this shows what classification has been applied to the product - the Hazard Statements along with their category rating - but as you realise for a site that is not manufacturing or using the goods but merely holding them whilst in transit it becomes a labourious task. Even on a spreadsheet you need to constantly update the site quantities to determine if you are approaching the threshold.

Yes DG & COMAH are totally different when it comes to catergorisation the issue I have is DG classification is easy and there is lots of info available

Yet COMAH categories are not, theres not a great deal of info available even the Environmental Agency can't tell me what an E1 (Hazardous to the Aquatic Environment) hazard is, yet they have joint responsibility for enforcing COMAH 

I guess its just a matter of speaking to the write person.

Originally Posted by: Kate

As far as I know, dangerous goods classification and COMAH classification are separate things for different purposes, so you should expect them to be somewhat disjointed.

The consignor will not know what other materials you are holding at site nor in what quantities - responsibilities arise for the consignor at each shipment

Hi Mersey

This thread illustrates the risk of getting too hung up on specific legislation.

So, let's suppose COMAH doesn't apply.

You still have lots of nasty materials and you need to know what could happen - whether that be fire, toxic release or whatever - otherwise you cannot adequately mitigate the risks.

Reminiscent of the Beirut port fire in 2020. Does it matter whether COMAH or equivalent applied?

I do get your point however if it does fall into COMAH there is a process required HSE / EA notification. I can't ignore it.

Its not just write an emergency response plan and risk assessment or MAPP's theres loads of work required and investment to get a site to such a standard. It's a reason why people stay under the threshold 

Thanks

Originally Posted by: peter gotch

Hi Mersey

This thread illustrates the risk of getting too hung up on specific legislation.

So, let's suppose COMAH doesn't apply.

You still have lots of nasty materials and you need to know what could happen - whether that be fire, toxic release or whatever - otherwise you cannot adequately mitigate the risks.

Reminiscent of the Beirut port fire in 2020. Does it matter whether COMAH or equivalent applied?

Originally Posted by: Mersey

all I'm after is the consignor (or originator) to interpret the COMAH catergory upfront, legally they need a DGN but the DGN doesn't give this information. I've a feeling (not factual I need to research) that the onus is on them to provide this infomation if we are storing their product.

Having been on the consignor side I have had no obligation to interpret a specific UK requirement on behalf of either my consignee or any intermediary (storage or transport).

A DGN is an international modal document which is difficult enough to complete for mandated information.

If you are acting as a storage facility for what I presume are several consignors and consignees how do you determine without reference to an SDS the appropriate storage and segregation requirements?

Hi Mersey

Firstly, I do think you have perhaps highlighted a loophole in the legislation as I don't think there is any specific legislation that tells the consignor to give you the transit storer sufficient information to inform YOUR risk assessment.

However, you throw up a couple of other issues:

1. Legislation that is based on Hazard rather than Risk generally by setting thresholds for application.

2. A two tier regulatory system when the regulator is free at the point of delivery sometimes but not always.

So, starting with No 1.

Examples obviously including scenarios such as yours where a site may not be subject to COMAH or be Lower or Upper Tier.

Then we had reservoirs - until relatively recently the threshold for application was 25,000 m3 maximum capacity and I got to work on a few projects where the the reservoir operator chose to reduce capacity to avoid the need for all the things that needed to be done, including the involvement of ICE "Panel Engineers" of whom there is limited supply so they don't come cheap. Ironically this was at a time when consultation was going on to move to a risk-based approach, albeit still with a threshold but reduced to 10,000 m3 - so our client was potentially wasting money if a reservoir of say 20,000 m3 capacity was located such that any dam failure could result in significant loss of life.

So, as example you could compare that reservoir upstream of lots of people with Loch Katrine - if Katrine failed the socio-economic impact would be huge but the downstream population at risk is tiny.

For perspective, a 36 inch cast iron main failed last week. Took out the water supply to 100,000 properties but they are just a fraction of the population who rely on Katrine and alternative supply wss in place within a few hours, as there is back up infrastructure many miles South of Loch Katrine. 

...and, now we have a threshold for post Grenfell legislation. More than 18m or seven storerys. Not much comfort for those living 6m up in a building with flammable cladding, and my guess is that it is only a matter of time before the risk-based approach kicks in.

No 2 - usually when the Inspector Calls it is free at least until such time that the HSE bod finds fault and decides to pen an FFI and charge £163 per hour.

But for certain things the regulator charges for some or all of their work. So for an Upper Tier site, just about everything whether or not directly connected to checking COMAH issues, and for a Lower Tier site only for the COMAH work.

Hence, a clear financial incentive to avoid being classified as COMAH, and particularly avoiding hitting the thresholds for Upper Tier, particularly as the hourly rate is even higher than for FFI - £192 which adds up to a large bill very quickly!

But those thresholds could lead to complacency if a site can avoid application and a defence "we weren't covered by COMAH" is not going to be much help if the site goes bang or releases huge quantities of nasties in to the environment.

Edited by user 03 February 2023 15:36:41(UTC)  | Reason: Incomplete sentence

Hi Kate

An interesting (but perhaps over pragmatic) perspective from ONE Inspector!!

I don't remember such an argument being part of the Consultation processes for CIMAH and then either version of COMAH.(but I might have missed a line).

Clearly part of the way you go about reducing risk is to reduce the hazard.

In ye olden days, organisations would sometimes put up a platform at 6 feet so as to avoid hitting the 6 foot 6 inches (2m) threshold when edge protection was required. Apparently falling only 6 feet didn't hurt?!?!

P

Rather than start a new thread about COMAH, the other issue I have is interpretation of SDS and Schedule 1

Take Petrol for example I pulled up various SDS’s which all categorise Petrol differently 2 for example;

• BP SDS states that Petrol is “FLAMMABLE LIQUIDS - Category 1”
• Merck SDS states that Petrol is “FLAMMABLE LIQUID - Category 3”

So depending of which SDS I look at for this product is whether I can store 10 Tonnes or 5,000 Tonnes huge difference, but then there is another spanner thrown into the works which is Environmental hazards, which I’d assume petrol is, so there are other thresholds in COMAH for E1 or E2  Environmental Hazards! Example E1 Hazardous to the Aquatic Environment in Category Acute 1 - 100 Tonnes and E2 is 200 Tonnes. Then there’s another spanner thrown in the works in Schedule 1 Part 2 (named substances) number 34 on the list Petroleum products and alternative fuels 2500 Tonnes is the threshold.

They don’t make it easy which one do I choose ? Go for the lowest one to be safe not sure I’ll be flavour of the month with the commercial sales team ( not that it bothers me if its wrong its wrong)

Personally unless I am looking at laboratory reagents I would avoid SDS from Merck or Sigma-Aldrich.

You want the suppliers SDS for their product.

I would validate the supplier classification on the ECHA web site by looking up the identification numbers CAS/EC/Index https://echa.europa.eu/ as this will tell you if there is a harmonised classification for the substance all suppliers should be using.

e.g. Petroleum EC 232-298-5, CAS 8002-05-9, Index 649-049-00-5 has a harmonised classification of Carc.1B but then further down as you have seen various notifiers have assigned Flam Liquid 1, 2 or even 3

This is not the same CAS number as 64742-48-9 which appears on the Merck Petroleum SDS 109718

Well, IMO, the consignor has little or no input into whether YOU need to implement COMAH,

They need to comply with the relevant legislation whilst they are getting the stuff from their premises to yours,

Once it's on your site, you have to determine whether there is the liklihood of a Major Accident Hazard and plan/implement accordingly, as only you know what materials you have onsite and their potential risks and hazards in the event of a Major Accident or Hazard.

Even the SDS can't give you concrete guidance as it will depend on what other hazardous materials and quantities you have onsite, the risk to the site, risk to the community and local area and any need for specialist input from the Emergency Service

If you have to go down the COMAH route you're opening yourself up to a whole lot of pain, admin and regulatory compliance and audits etc for what maybe a COSHH matter once you've broken it down into bits and considered it.