Wissenschaftliche Artikel der BAM
Filtern
Dokumenttyp
Sprache
- Englisch (2)
Referierte Publikation
- nein (2)
Schlagworte
Organisationseinheit der BAM
- 2.0 Abteilungsleitung und andere (2) (entfernen)
Laboratory test results are of vital importance for correctly classifying and labelling chemicals as “hazardous” as defined in the UN Globally Harmonized System (GHS) / EC CLP Regulation or as “dangerous goods” as defined in the UN Recommendations on the Transport of Dangerous Goods. Interlaboratory tests play a decisive role in assessing the reliability of laboratory test results. Interlaboratory tests performed over the last 10 years have examined different laboratory test methods. After analysing the results of these interlaboratory tests, the following conclusions can be drawn:
1. There is a need for improvement and validation for all laboratory test methods examined.
2. To avoid any discrepancy concerning the classification and labelling of chemicals, the use of validated laboratory test methods should be state of the art, with the results accompanied by the measurement uncertainty and (if applicable) the probability of incorrect classification.
This paper addresses the probability of correct/incorrect classification (for example, as dangerous goods) on the basis of the measurement deviation obtained from interlaboratory tests performed by the Centre for quality assurance for testing of dangerous goods and hazardous substances (CEQAT-DGHS) to validate laboratory test methods. This paper outlines typical results (e.g. so-called “Shark profiles” – the probability of incorrect classification as a function of the true value estimated from interlaboratory test data) as well as general conclusions and steps to be taken to guarantee that laboratory test results are fit for purpose and of high quality.
The Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (UN-GHS) is being implemented in more and more countries all over the world; the EU has done so with the CLP-Regulation (EU-CLP). Compared to the undeniably important questions on health and environmental hazards, the classification of physical hazards of chemicals often has not been in the focus, although their implementation can be challenging and there are traps and pitfalls to be avoided. The following overview of the classification systematics for physical hazards aims at a principle understanding without detailing all criteria or test methods. Similarities and differences between the classification systems of the UN-GHS and EU-CLP, the transport of dangerous goods and the former EU system are reviewed with regard to the physical hazard classes. Available physical hazard classifications for the transport of dangerous goods and according to the former EU system can be used as available information when classifying according to the GHS. However, the interfaces of these classification systems and their limitations have to be understood well when concluding on GHS/CLP classifications. This applies not only to industry when applying CLP but especially to legislators when adapting legislation that in one way or another refers to the classification of chemicals.