Skip to content
You are here: Home
Does a Generic LQ Mark for Limited Quantities Offer any Benefit?

By Frits Wybenga, Senior Technical Advisor    September, 2007

PHMSA recently posed a number of questions on a tentative decision by the UN Subcommittee at its July meeting to replace the existing package marking requirement for limited quantities of dangerous goods with a new mark consisting of the letters “LQ”. Opinions on this subject are almost as varied as the products that would be affected themselves. The author seeks to clarify what is currently being proposed, presents a European perspective on the issue and encourages readers to weigh in on this subject.

 


 

 

To formulate their position for the next UN meeting, PHMSA recently posed a number of questions on a tentative decision reached by the July 2007 UN Subcommittee of Experts on the Transport of Dangerous Goods. (Ed. Note: See July/August 2007 issue of HAZMAT Packager & Shipper, Report on UN Decisions by Andy Altemos, p. 13). This was the decision to replace the existing package marking requirement for limited quantities of dangerous goods with a new mark consisting of the letters “LQ” (see UN/SCETDG/31/INF.48 of the UN 31st session).

The UN working group effort was prompted by a paper submitted by the Association of Hazmat Shippers (AHS). Presumably the objective of AHS in making its proposal was to introduce into the UN Model Regulations some of the same regulatory relief provided for consumer commodities, or ORM-D materials, in the DOT Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR).

The need for further relaxation of requirements for consumer commodities, a subset of limited quantities, is always difficult for the European representatives at the UN to appreciate. This is because under the European road and rail regulations in the ADR and RID, the requirements for limited quantities are already close to the absolute minimum. With packages of limited quantities of dangerous goods only being subject to a marking requirement, it is hard for the Europeans to see any need for further regulatory relief for consumer commodities. With virtually no further possibilities for relaxation under the ADR and RID, it is not surprising that the UN working group arrived at the rather minimal proposal of replacing the existing package marking requirements for limited quantities with a mark consisting of the letters “LQ” surrounded by the square on point diamond.

The working group concluded that delegates should now vet the proposed new marking requirement in their respective countries to determine if this approach would enhance harmonization and would be acceptable from safety and operational perspectives.

The Current State of International Harmonization for Limited Quantity Markings
The current package marking requirements for limited quantities in paragraph 3.4.8 of the UN Model Regulations are fairly recent. They are based on similar marking requirements originally introduced in the ADR/RID (see for example paragraph 3.3.4(c) of the ADR). The UN requirement is for limited quantity packages to bear a mark consisting of the UN number surrounded by a diamond. The ADR/RID requirement is the same except that when the limited quantity package holds more than one item of dangerous goods, the letters “LQ” may be placed in the diamond instead of multiple UN numbers.

Package marking requirements for limited quantities are covered under §172.315 of the HMR. In place of the more common UN number and proper shipping name marking, the internationally required mark consisting of the UN number surrounded by a diamond is permitted.

With the UN marking having been adopted under the HMR as well as the IMDG Code and similar provisions included in the ADR/RID, a single limited quantity mark recognized worldwide could be at hand. ICAO plans to adopt the limited quantity mark in the next edition of the Technical Instructions. Use of the ADR/RID “LQ” mark is not recognized outside of Europe so that international shippers would be advised to stay with the UN number approach even when materials represented by different UN numbers are in the same package.

The HMR provide an alternative marking for limited quantities that meet the definition of consumer commodities. In place of the markings required for limited quantities they may be marked with the letters “ORM-D” and the proper shipping name (see §172.316).  Packages only meeting the ORM-D marking requirement would not be suitable for international transportation as this mark is not recognized outside the US. The regulations do not preclude dual marking so that it is permissible to mark a package with the international limited quantity marking as well as the ORM-D mark. In this way a company would only need a single product inventory to take advantage of the reduced shipping costs generally afforded ORM-D materials in the US while still meeting the international requirements.

The Domestic Benefits of ORM-D over Limited Quantities
Under the HMR, limited quantities are excepted from labeling, performance packaging, segregation requirements and from placarding for rail and highway. But other requirements still apply. Shipping papers are required. In the case of air transport, limited quantity packages are subject to loading and handling restrictions under §175.75.


This article, in its entirety,  is archived in HAZMAT Packager & Shipper's HazMat Database, an optional feature to subscribers. Information on obtaining a subscription to HAZMAT Packager & Shipper and its associated features can be found here.

 
 
Site Tools
Narrow screen resolution Wide screen resolution Auto adjust screen size Increase font size Decrease font size Default font size

Recent Examples of our Expert Level Analysis

Comments on DOT Letters of Interpretation: Section 173.217

UN Meetings in Geneva

Docket HM-215I Review

Security Regulations for Chemical Facilities

DOT announcements made at a recent DGAC meeting

Vibration Testing of IBCs with Water
 
UN Is Close to a Decision on Revised Limited Quantities Requirements

Problems with High Level DOT Specification Packaging Markings

Comments on DOT Letters of Interpretation: Sections 172.401 and 172.407

Combustible Liquids: Dis-Harmonization Still Rules

Comments on DOT Letters of Interpretation: Sections 107.601, 171.1, and 172.800

IMO DSC Subcommittee -- Dangerous Goods By Vessel

ICAO Panel Finalizes Amendments to ICAO Technical Instructions

Small Quantity Shipments

Revised ICAO Packing Instructions

Comments on DOT Letters of Interpretation: Section 172.504

Comments on DOT Letters of Interpretation, Sections 171.8 and 173.25

Does a Generic LQ Mark for Limited Quantities Offer any Benefit

Shipping Name Markings on Portable Tanks

Comments on DOT Letters of Interpretation; Sections 173.22 and 178.2

Questions for the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

The Latest Round in the Revisions to the ICAO Packing Instructions

Comments on DOT Letters of Interpretation; Section 171.16(d)

Summary of DOT’s FY2005 Hazardous Materials Penalty Action Report

Comments on DOT Letters of Interpretation; Sections 173.12(c) and 173.28

UN Sub-Committee Meeting Report

Workshop on Reducing the Risk of Hazardous Materials Incidents During Loading and Unloading Operations 

Comments on DOT Letters of Interpretation; Section 172.802

Issues with Docket HM-206F NPRM

Where is DOT’s packaging testing program headed

Combination Packaging for Dangerous Goods Liquids Problem Assessment

Comments on DOT Letters of Interpretation; Sections 172.101 and 173.199

Shipping ORM-D Consumer Commodity By Air