TDG via external load

[Bif]

The TDG regs don't specify anywhere that there is a difference between transporting DGs internally or externally.

Has anyone out there applied for a TDG Equivalency Certificate to allow them to transport DG via external load in a manner that does not comply with the TDGR?

I know of, and have applied for (and received), the blanket Equivalency Certificate for 'Aerial Work' (plus an additional list of activities).

But I think TC would argue that simply transporting DG from A to B does not constitute Aerial Work even if it's via external load. 

I'm thinking maybe there's a case to be made for an Equivalency Certificate specific to longline operations.

Does Fred Jones still frequent this forum? Anyone else want to give me their 2 cents?

[twinstar_ca]

Would the big issue be whether or not you could jettison the external load?? If it's carried internally, the options are much less available... All my experience is with internal DG's...

[Heliian]

3 hours ago, Bif said:

But I think TC would argue that simply transporting DG from A to B does not constitute Aerial Work even if it's via external load.

We transport dangerous goods via external load all the time and I would classify that as work and we'll outside any tdg regulations.

Do you have a specific case or need for such an exemption? 

 

 

[DGP]

I think we have all slung jet fuel...without a special permit.

[Heliian]

6 hours ago, DGP said:

I think we have all slung jet fuel...without a special permit.

propane, gasoline, batteries, sulfuric acid, cement, magnets, etc, etc.

 

[Freewheel]

22 hours ago, Bif said:

The TDG regs don't specify anywhere that there is a difference between transporting DGs internally or externally.

Has anyone out there applied for a TDG Equivalency Certificate to allow them to transport DG via external load in a manner that does not comply with the TDGR?

I know of, and have applied for (and received), the blanket Equivalency Certificate for 'Aerial Work' (plus an additional list of activities).

But I think TC would argue that simply transporting DG from A to B does not constitute Aerial Work even if it's via external load. 

I'm thinking maybe there's a case to be made for an Equivalency Certificate specific to longline operations.

Does Fred Jones still frequent this forum? Anyone else want to give me their 2 cents?

TC Civil Aviation would have nothing to argue about. Simply conducting an external load automatically makes the flight a 702 aerial work flight under the CARs. You cannot conduct external load under 703, only 702.

The CARs define Aerial Work as:
“A commercial air service other than an air transport service or a flight training service”

Aerial work under CARs section 702 involves:
(a) the carriage on board of persons other than flight crew members ;
(b) the carriage of helicopter Class B, C or D external loads;
(c) the towing of objects (e.g., banners); or
(d) the dispersal of products

With that being said it's irrelevant because the CARs don't apply to the Transportation of Dangerous Goods. The relevant legislation is the "Transportation of Dangerous Goods Regulations (TDGR)".  The TDGRs do not define aerial work, rather they provide a list of specific activities for which the provisions of Section 12.12 on Aerial Work apply.

(a)  active fire suppression; 
(b)  aerial cloud seeding; 
(c)  aerial drip torching; 
(d)  agriculture; 
(e)  avalanche control; 
(f)  forestry; 
(g)  horticulture; 
(h)  hydrographic or seismographic work; or 
(i)  pollution control.

Transport Canada does not interpret "Aerial Work" in the TDGRs  to be the same as  CARs definition for aerial work, so any time you are transporting Dangerous Goods (either externally or internally) to persons conducting “work” in limited access areas, related to the activities in TDGR 12.12 it qualifies as an aerial work flight under the TDGRs. While the flight, may be considered Air Taxi under the CARs, it is still interpreted as Aerial Work under the TDGRs. 

If you are looking for confirmation of this fact from Fred Jones, review the following TDG discussion paper posted on the HAC website:

https://www.h-a-c.ca/Part 12 - Paper 4 - Aerial Work - EN-1.pdf

The purpose of the Equivalency Certificate is not "to allow them to transport DG via external load in a manner that does not comply with the TDGR", but to allow you Transport the DGs under TDGR 12.12,  while conducting activities related to additional industries/sectors that are listed in TDGR 12.12 (usually found in Appendix A). The EC is pretty much a copy and paste of TDGR 12.12. The only difference is the addition of other permitted activities.

Although the flights you are conducting may meet the requirements for transportation under 12.9 limited access, there are benefits to transporting DGs under 12.12 Aerial Work requirements (as opposed to 12.9). 

Here are a few examples:

1.    TDGR 12.9 Limited Access limits which Dangerous Goods can be Transported 12.12 Aerial work does not
•    the DGs that are allowed to be shipped under "Limited access provisions of the TDGR are limited to the items listed in TDGR 12.9. You cannot transport any other  items except what is listed under TDGR 12.9.
•    Specific DGs are not limited under 12.12 Aerial Work. All dangerous goods that are not “forbidden” can be transported under this section of the TDGR 12.12 Aerial work.
2.    TDGR 12.9 limited access has more strict “means of containment” requirements; Section 12.12 “means of containment” requirements are less stringent and not limited by size
•    Examples: Under 12.9 Maximum size propane cylinder that is allowed to be transported is 120 L Volume, flammable liquids must be contained in a “small means of containment” which is 230 L or less
•    large fuel tanks greater than 230L are another example of a means of containment that cannot be transported under 12.9 limited access; under 12.12 aerial work the there is no limit to the size of the means of containment; the DGs simply need to be “transported in a package or container that has been designed, constructed, filled, closed and secured so that, under normal conditions of handling and transport, there will be no accidental release or leakage…” 

3.    Section 12. 9 Limited Access documentation requirements are less strict than fully regulated ICAO air shipments of TDGs, however Section 12.12 Documentation requirements are much less stringent than 12.9 limited access yet.
•    Under 12.9 Limited access shipments:  a Dangerous Goods record needs to be completed daily by the pilot. If the pilot does not load or oversee loading, he must also be provided a NOTOC form . All relevant DG documents shall be retained for a minimum of 2 years
•    12.12 Aerial Work DG shipments. For 12.12 Aerial Work shipments, the pilot does not need to complete record daily and records are not required to be retained. So, for a flight that the pilot loads or oversees the loading of DGs, under 12.12, no documentation is required. If the pilot does not load or oversee the loading of DGs, a NOTOC form is required, however that almost never happens. In most cases, a pilot can oversee the loading from the pilot's seat, whether its an internal or external load.

Hope that helps,

Fly safe everyone. Hopefully its a banner year.

[Bif]

Thank you Freewheel, I had read the HAC discussion paper and was having issues wrapping my head around aerial work as interpreted by CARs vs TDGR.

The specific example we're grappling with is needing to longline propane under Limited Access in cylinders larger than 100L. 100L is the maximum cylinder capacity allowed by 12.9 limited access unless the cylinders are rated TC51 or DOT51.

 

The counter argument was raised that these restrictions shouldn't apply to an external load, however I was told otherwise by a TDG inspector, granted they work in the 'Surface' branch. But getting a straight answer from either TC or TDG is like pulling teeth.

[Bif]

3 hours ago, Freewheel said:

The TDGRs do not define aerial work, rather they provide a list of specific activities for which the provisions of Section 12.12 on Aerial Work apply.

(a)  active fire suppression; 
(b)  aerial cloud seeding; 
(c)  aerial drip torching; 
(d)  agriculture; 
(e)  avalanche control; 
(f)  forestry; 
(g)  horticulture; 
(h)  hydrographic or seismographic work; or 
(i)  pollution control.

Transport Canada does not interpret "Aerial Work" in the TDGRs  to be the same as  CARs definition for aerial work, so any time you are transporting Dangerous Goods (either externally or internally) to persons conducting “work” in limited access areas, related to the activities in TDGR 12.12 it qualifies as an aerial work flight under the TDGRs. While the flight, may be considered Air Taxi under the CARs, it is still interpreted as Aerial Work under the TDGRs. 

If you are looking for confirmation of this fact from Fred Jones, review the following TDG discussion paper posted on the HAC website:

https://www.h-a-c.ca/Part 12 - Paper 4 - Aerial Work - EN-1.pdf

The purpose of the Equivalency Certificate is not "to allow them to transport DG via external load in a manner that does not comply with the TDGR", but to allow you Transport the DGs under TDGR 12.12,  while conducting activities related to additional industries/sectors that are listed in TDGR 12.12 (usually found in Appendix A). The EC is pretty much a copy and paste of TDGR 12.12. The only difference is the addition of other permitted activities.

Although the flights you are conducting may meet the requirements for transportation under 12.9 limited access, there are benefits to transporting DGs under 12.12 Aerial Work requirements (as opposed to 12.9). 

Here are a few examples:

1.    TDGR 12.9 Limited Access limits which Dangerous Goods can be Transported 12.12 Aerial work does not
•    the DGs that are allowed to be shipped under "Limited access provisions of the TDGR are limited to the items listed in TDGR 12.9. You cannot transport any other  items except what is listed under TDGR 12.9.
•    Specific DGs are not limited under 12.12 Aerial Work. All dangerous goods that are not “forbidden” can be transported under this section of the TDGR 12.12 Aerial work.
2.    TDGR 12.9 limited access has more strict “means of containment” requirements; Section 12.12 “means of containment” requirements are less stringent and not limited by size
•    Examples: Under 12.9 Maximum size propane cylinder that is allowed to be transported is 120 L Volume, flammable liquids must be contained in a “small means of containment” which is 230 L or less
•    large fuel tanks greater than 230L are another example of a means of containment that cannot be transported under 12.9 limited access; under 12.12 aerial work the there is no limit to the size of the means of containment; the DGs simply need to be “transported in a package or container that has been designed, constructed, filled, closed and secured so that, under normal conditions of handling and transport, there will be no accidental release or leakage…” 

3.    Section 12. 9 Limited Access documentation requirements are less strict than fully regulated ICAO air shipments of TDGs, however Section 12.12 Documentation requirements are much less stringent than 12.9 limited access yet.
•    Under 12.9 Limited access shipments:  a Dangerous Goods record needs to be completed daily by the pilot. If the pilot does not load or oversee loading, he must also be provided a NOTOC form . All relevant DG documents shall be retained for a minimum of 2 years
•    12.12 Aerial Work DG shipments. For 12.12 Aerial Work shipments, the pilot does not need to complete record daily and records are not required to be retained. So, for a flight that the pilot loads or oversees the loading of DGs, under 12.12, no documentation is required. If the pilot does not load or oversee the loading of DGs, a NOTOC form is required, however that almost never happens. In most cases, a pilot can oversee the loading from the pilot's seat, whether its an internal or external load.

Hope that helps,

Fly safe everyone. Hopefully its a banner year.

Here's where I'm getting hung up.

My interpretation of the TDGR 12.12 that you quote above is that unless you are conducting those specific activities (or the list of activities Appendix A of the HAC Equivalency Certificate), TDGR does not consider it to be aerial work.

So, my example of transporting Propane for a back country hut, via external load... Is this aerial work so far as the TDGR are concerned? Or are we limited to the restrictions of 12.9 Limited Access regardless of the method by which the Propane is transported?

[simpleton]

You need an equivalency certificate to move a propane pig. That's why forestry has their own equivalency certs....lots of helicopter companies get their own.

I've never understood why it would be legal to operate under a client's (aka Forestry's) equivalency certificate.

 

 

[Freewheel]

12 hours ago, Bif said:

Here's where I'm getting hung up.

My interpretation of the TDGR 12.12 that you quote above is that unless you are conducting those specific activities (or the list of activities Appendix A of the HAC Equivalency Certificate), TDGR does not consider it to be aerial work.

So, my example of transporting Propane for a back country hut, via external load... Is this aerial work so far as the TDGR are concerned? Or are we limited to the restrictions of 12.9 Limited Access regardless of the method by which the Propane is transported?

I believe your interpretation is correct. You would need to apply for an equivalency certificate to transport the larger propane tanks under 12.9 limited access( if you are unable to comply with 12.12.). Flying propane to a persons hunting or fishing camp, or “back country hut” would not qualify as Aerial work under 12.12.

I don’t however believe you would need to have an Equivalency certificate to transport them when conducting activities such as Forestry. Who knows why they would apply for their own ECs. They can already transport them under 12.12 with no additional equivalency certificate require. The reason they have them is likely that all of this is so convoluted and silly that they don’t realize that the EC is not required lol. Also it likely isn’t legal for an operator to transport DGs under a clients EC. That would be the responsibility of the air operator who is transporting them.

SAFETY FIRST LOL.