Paint and DG

[Douglas Racer]

Hello all SafetyBods,

We all know paint is listed in the IATA manual as DG. It seems to me, however, that since it does not distinguish paint types (oil or water based PVA) that certain shippers in my neck of the woods have decided that PVA water based paints are not DG, and may be flown in any quantity required! Their argument is that being waterbased, it is non-flammable, but what about corrosion?

Having asked the paint industry for answers and doing some research of my own, I have come across ISO documents suggesting that your common or garden PVA may contain mercury, and we all know that mercury and aircraft don't mix all that well.

Remember that can of old PVA in the corner of the garage, which when moved after a couple of years or three, dropped its guts on your shoes because the can had corroded completely?

Is there anybody out there from the flying side who can shed a bit more light on this subject? I'm still waiting for the paint industry to respond.

[FWA NATCA]

Have you tried making an inquiry with the enviromental protection agency about the paint? Before you start raising the red flags make sure you have all your documentation in order.

Mike

[sky330]

My two cents,

The fact that it is non-flammable is not enough to classify it as non-DG. ALL prescriptions of the DGR must be respected!
If it contains mercury, it must respect the relevant procedure for it.

The packaging used must be suitable for air transport even if it is non-DG (vibration, pressurization,..) . If it is DG, the packaging must respond to even stringer rules.

Otherwise, what about a huge tank of 15.000 liters of water,....
It is non-flammable, but if it leaks, I think corrosion will be a real minor factor compared with trim problem

[Douglas Racer]

I've learnt a helluva lot about paint in the last couple of days, mostly from the paint industry.

1. The safest way to go is to know exactly what the paint is made of, this via an MSDS (Material Safety Data Sheet).obtainable from the supplier.

2. In general, PVA or common or garden housepaint is safe to fly, but once again, if it is used in an industrial capacity it might be made to spec, e.g. paint used on an oil rig (flameproof) or to paint the walls of a laboratory, may be specially mixed, and may contain "additives", therefore, go the MSDS way to be sure.

3. Of course, it remains for the shipper to declare these differences. Agreed, FWA NATCA, paperwork must be accurate.

Is there anyone out there who has had a spillage of PVA and did it prove problematic, need some history on this? We've had a scare, scheduling a lifting of floors, and will lab test anything found to make sure.

Has anyone read a doc ISO 3856-7:1984 and if so will it be worth the CHF54 pricetag to me? It deals with the mercury content of PVA pigments.:)

[Captain Fantastic]

With regards the paint/DG issue :

Oil based paints are classified as DG due to their flammability risk(Class 3 Flammable Liquids)

The determination as to whether water based/acrylic paints (or any products for that matter) are restricted as DGs is determined by whether anything in it's chemical makeup presents a significant enough risk. As mentioned in another posting, reference must be made to a Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) to determine this.

With regards your commentary about corrosion - this is more likely a problem with the metal container rather than the paint having corrosive qualities. There is generally not enough corrosive chemicals in paint to cause it to be restricted as a DG.

Using another example - a popular brand of soft drink has a corrosive as part of it's formula. In it's pure undiluted form, this corrosive is regulated as a dangerous good. However when mixed to form the soft drink, there is not enough corrosive to have the product restricted as a DG. (It is however corrosive enough to do a good job of cleaning coins!)

Hope this sheds more light on the paint issue.

[CR2]

Doesn't it depend on the Flashpoint? I'll have a look into the IATA DGR book.

[Captain Fantastic]

Any flammable liquid with a flash point greater than 60.5 degrees C is not regulated as a dangerous good

[CR2]

Wouldn't that be lower than 60.5 ? ;)

[Captain Fantastic]

No, greater. If a liquid has a relatively high flashpoint it is less likely to ignite in high temperature situations (such as heat from a nearby fire). The lower the flashpoint temperature the greater the risk.

Table 3.3A in Section 3 of the IATA DG Regs outlines this.

[CR2]

Doh :eek:

Silly me, serves me right for posting while not awake!

:ouch:

You're of course quite correct!