Harmonisation in the regulations that govern the transport of dangerous goods has for many years been seen as vital, as there is a big slice of the business that involves multimodal and/or international movements. As such, there are mechanisms through which regulators can make sure that their rulebooks are, insofar as is possible, aligned. In Europe that mechanism is the Joint Meeting of RID/ADR/ADN experts, which ensures that the common parts of the three surface mode regulations (rail, road and inland waterways) allow for seamless multimodal transport across the borders of the various contracting states.
One task the Joint Meeting set itself a few years ago was, through an informal working group, to set some standards for the use of telematics and the electronic transmission of transport documentation through the supply chain. The Joint Meeting is concerned, for one thing, that other pan-European bodies might establish standards that are not suitable for application in the world of dangerous goods, with all its particularities in terms of documentation, hazard communication and handling procedures.
The work that has been done so far is, however, inconclusive. At its autumn 2018 meeting, the Joint Meeting heard about current progress but it seems that the working group has not yet been able to define the various participants in the supply chain, or the need each has for access to information.
One can sympathise. It can be a convoluted supply chain and can feature a shifting cast of players, sometimes with overlapping roles. Harking back to the establishment of the working group, there was also a keen awareness of the need to define standards that would allow information to be transferred electronically, without errors and with confidence that the right information would be provided to the right people.
Things have, though, moved on. And they have moved on quickly. Less than a year ago, EPCA hosted a workshop on digitisation in the chemical supply chain, which featured plenty of examples of how supply chains are being digitised with no need for intervention on the part of regulators or other authorities. Those examples included international and multimodal movements, with plenty of illustrations of how imaginative and innovative technology can be usefully employed across the chain.
At that event, experts addressed the different tools that are already available and the benefits that they can offer; quite often that means not just making the transfer of information faster and more accurate but also increasing transparency in the market and identifying inefficiencies. The big issue – still – is trust: information owners are often very reluctant to allow that information to get into the public domain, even if that domain is tightly fenced in and provides visibility only to those supply chain partners that need access.
There is one solution available that promises to make those fears redundant: blockchain. But at the EPCA workshop, most speakers who mentioned blockchain felt it was something for the future – there is plenty of low-hanging fruit ready to be picked before getting deeper into the wilds of IT.
And yet, just a few months later, we report this month on what is (as far as we know) the first successful trial of a blockchainbased digitised network in the chemicals sector. Things are moving fast and those who move fastest will have a big advantage in the marketplace. Maybe it’s time to give in to blockchain.
Peter Mackay
VOLUME
Letter from the
30 Years Ago
Learning by Training
from the Porch Swing
Where are they now?
Consolidation hots up
Let’s get ready to grumble Technical challenges for chemships
Keep it clean IMO’s actions on emissions
Design to reality Scanjet’s integrated tank management
Smoke signals Tracking sulphur emissions in real time
Please do not bend Dantec aims to protect hoses
News bulletin – tanker shipping
Next big thing
Looking ahead to LogiChem
Seeing is believing The supply chain needs transparency
Behind the wheel
Keeping the driver happy
On a Swiss roll Bertschi’s good year
The Saxon hoard Imperial adds to warehouse capacity
News bulletin – tanks and logistics
A trusted partner TankContainerFinder extends platform
Linking the chain Blockchain in practice
If you build it A simple way to e-commerce
Ahead of the game ProShip adopts Labelmaster system
In the zone
Keeping track of ATEX equipment
Training courses
diary
SAFETY
Incident Log 56
Close encounters
Understanding diesel runaway 58
Chill out
Dealing with polymerisation hazards 59
Golden rules
ITCO’s advice on sampling 60
Scramble, scramble!
ICAO gets working on 2021 rules 62
Ahead of the game
Joint Meeting works on RID/ADR/ADN
Fair enough
Looking ahead to Leipzig
THE BACK PAGE
Not otherwise specified 80
NEXT MONTH
Chemical distribution in North America
supply chain supplement
Annual IBC manufacturing survey
Storage terminal equipment
Media
Campaigns Director
As the UK struggles to disentangle itself in an orderly fashion from the EU, it is educational to look back 30 years and take a look at the concerns expressed at the time about closer ties with the mainland. In his editorial, then editor Mike Corkhill looked in particular at the UK’s plans to adopt ADR as the regulatory basis for its domestic road transport.
Mike wrote that, over the preceding decades, “Britain’s timehonoured barriers between itself and Europe have slowly, and often begrudgingly, crumbled”. At the time, though, with the completion of the Channel Tunnel only a few years away, he noted that “transport links have improved a hundredfold”.
Still, the prospect of adopting ADR was daunting. It was seen as a complicated set of regulations and not-user friendly, at least compared to the UK’s well-established regulations. That was, of course, before ADR was thoroughly restructured: it is now one of the most userfriendly sets of rules going.
Mike also raised the question of why the UK had not adopted ADR for domestic transport at some point after 1957, when it was implemented for international transport between the UK and the rest of Europe. Some government departments rejected that on the grounds that it would not properly safeguard the UK public. Fire brigades also felt that Europe’s Kemler placarding system used on tank vehicles was not as good as the UK’s own Hazchem system – although since adopting ADR the UK has managed to continue using Hazchem.
Overall, though, Mike felt that, with the establishment of a free market in the European Economic Community due to be in place in 1992, the concept of purely ‘domestic’ transport was diminishing.
As such, while there might be some short-term impact on industry, the UK was right to move over to ADR for domestic transport. “It may be painful – like the loss of shillings and pence – but future shippers and carriers of dangerous goods can only benefit from a harmonised system,” he said.
Transport companies in the UK are currently wondering whether Brexit will deliver painful short-term impacts (or even long-term problems) but there is no suggestion that the UK will stop applying ADR, which perhaps indicates that industry and regulators are both more comfortable with it than they were back in 1989.
Meanwhile, the February 1989 issue reported on the September 1988 joint meeting of RID/ADR experts (there being no ADN in those days). There was a lot of discussion about proposals to revise the provisions for Division 4.1 flammable solids, although reading through our report it is still not clear why some liquids end up in that classification.
It is also instructive to learn that it was only in 1988 that the RID and ADR regulations were beginning to adopt the UN’s system of ‘NOS’ or ‘not otherwise specified’ entries. Up to that point, there were ‘restrictive’ and ‘non-restrictive’ classes and divisions in RID/ ADR: ‘restrictive’ classes covered only substances explicitly specified, while ‘non-restrictive’ classes included any substance meeting the definitions. It was found that, with the revision of the Division 4.1 work, the NOS approach worked much better. However, given the amount of work involved, proposals to do the same for Divisions 4.2 and 4.3 had to be held over for another year.
In the Netherlands, the so-called PGS 29 is used as a standard reference to prevent risk in tank storage terminals. It uses the ‘bow tie’ methodology, scenario description or goal-based requirements. I have been to presentations at StocExpo about this approach and wanted to write something about before Christmas and the hopeful beginnings of 2019.
When I wrote the book Safety Of Ethics some years ago, based on my Master’s thesis, I researched and found that despite the evergrowing number and volume of guidelines and regulations, they only cover ‘linear’ cause and effect relationships. Linear means the direct correlation between an error and its direct consequence. Such a mistake is also known as an error of commission.
PGS 29, in my view, is written along this well-trodden path and, therefore, I don’t see how it can prevent ‘non-linear’ accidents or risks. My ongoing research is about my observation and scientific findings that our industrial creations are just too complex to regulate from the outside with yet another set of recommendations or prohibitions. Nature shows and proves to us that our non-linear earth, planet, environment, as well as us, you and me, people, do not abide to linear regulation. No amount of rules, regulations or laws written down or imposed with force from the outside will be able to prevent non-linear risks or accidents.
So, what is this phenomenon we call non-linearity, you may ask? In short: two understandings and explanations. Linear systems usually are predictable and more or less controllable by instruction; non-linearity may be steered by information called feedback, but needs constant adjustment and adaptivity (learning); it does not allow instruction - we speak about a closed-loop approach.
A good example is to watch cigarette smoke: In a windless room, the first smoke seems to rise up in one line. But after a little while, the smoke starts to twirl, and becomes unpredictable: it shifts from linear to non-linear behaviour.
We base guides like the PGS 29 on reductionistic analysis but fail to accept the limitations of scientific determinism. Such approach only reaches the borders, or limitations, of linearity and cannot explain or control what can happen in the realm of non-linearity (environment, behaviour, society). More is needed to understand this ‘complexity’.
But there is a workable answer to this dilemma. We can use the exciting new science of steering and control named ‘Systems Theory’, which deals with complex systems such as our industries, social environment or politics. I believe - and actually know - that we have come to the limit of functionality of man’s created preventive tools such as the PGS 29 and need to move forward to understand complexity and related definitions like disturbance, perturbations, equilibrium and balance of living systems. Industries we have built are alive. To predict their longevity and sustainability in our nonlinear complex society, we must not make an error of omission: not doing what we should do.
Let’s do that during 2019! Happy New Year!
This is the latest in a series of articles by Arend van Campen, founder of TankTerminalTraining. More information on the company’s activities can be found at www.tankterminaltraining.com.
Those interested in responding personally can contact him directly at arendvc@tankterminaltraining.com.
One day last November I found myself in another country digging in the dirt. I spent parts of two weekends at my friends’ house, so it seemed only fair to help out with planting their new hedge. The soil turned out to be rather poor and we were going to need some fertilizer. Where I live it’s common to buy bags of cow manure, but I was in another country, and in the middle of sheep-raising territory to boot. So, I asked my friends if we could go get some cow manure, or, I continued, “maybe you use sheep shit here”.
I dunno, I’m not sure there are such things as “bad words”. But there are some times
when using certain words is considered impolite, and I had just used uttered one of those words. I attempted to apologize, but one of my friends reassured me, “oh, we say shit here, too”. And we were off. We had a long, rather jolly, conversation about all sorts of animal excrement.
We talked about coyote urine, and how it’s used as a repellant to prey animals that like to munch on gardens. And not just coyote urine, but wolf urine or bobcat urine or other predator urines, too. Urine isn’t just a repellant either, some urines are used as attractants, especially for trapping.
I related a story involving a seaside town with a boardwalk, at which a seagull stole a french-fried potato from a strolling tourist, leaving some seagull poop on his head in exchange. That opened the discussion to a whole array of bird poop stories, none of which need to be repeated here.
No thorough discussion of poop would be complete without mentioning odor. I used to ride with a bicycle club in rural areas of North Carolina, and we could tell which kind of farm was around the bend ahead, just by the smell. We even rated various different odors. Chicken shit is absolutely the most foul
smelling, followed by pig poop. Cow manure is toward the other end of the scale, but least offensive of all are horse droppings. Unfortunately, or perhaps fortunately, I did not get out on a bicycle in southern England and therefore cannot tell you where sheep shit would rate on the continuum.
Eventually though, we got back around to the uses of poop, and fertilizer in particular. Different animals eat different things, and different animals have different metabolic processes and different gut microflora, so the composition of animal shit can be quite varied. Different plants have different nutritional needs, too, and so sometimes animal poops are matched to the kinds of plants they would be the best fertilizers for. Some zoos are aware of this, and take advantage of this by selling exotic animal poops. Now, I have no clue which plants elephant shit is a good fertilizer for, nor do I know which plants would best benefit from giraffe shit or bear shit, but there are people who do know. And I applaud the zoos for finding a way to charge people money for hauling the zoo’s waste away.
Shit differences aren’t just significant from animal family to animal family, but from species to species, and probably from region to region within an animal family, too. Recently, bat caves came to my attention in two different ways. First, I came across some information that bat guano (by the way, how many terms have we used for the same thing; shit, manure, droppings, poop, excrement, and now, guano) is used as fertilizer too, but the source bat cave determines which plants it is best for. When ordering bat shit on-line, you will also need to know which cave you want your guano to be sourced from. Second, I read about some tourists dying from a viral lung infection they acquired from walking through the dried and powdery bat guano on a cave floor.
I need a short narrative detour now, to explain to you that, once upon a time in Antwerp, a whole new classification scheme for 6.2 was being introduced, and I was there to learn about Category A and Category B for the first time. When it came time for questions to the doctor
that helped the WHO, the CDC and Health Canada create the indicative Category A list, I overcame my natural shyness and leapt out of my seat with my hand waving. At that time, transport of HIV-positive (HIV+) blood was a huge concern for our industry, and HIV+ blood wasn’t on the new Category A list. I also wanted to know why the microorganism that’s probably killed more humans than any other in history, Vibrio cholerae, wasn’t on the list either.
It was explained to me that there are two reasons a microorganism can be on the Category A list. Either contact with intact skin, or, inhalation of bioaerosols, must be likely to cause a potentially life-threatening infection. Neither HIV+ blood nor Vibrio cholerae cause infection when on intact skin. Much lab work and testing was done on HIV+ blood, but basically blood is too thick and heavy to allow micro-droplets which could be inhaled, so HIV+ blood can’t be Category A. Vibrio cholerae is very water dependent, and drops big enough to hold an infectious dose are too big to stay airborne, while smaller airborne droplets don’t have enough water to support an infectious dose. So, no, V. cholerae isn’t on the Category A list either.
In other words, if in the event of a transportation related release, if either a splash on the skin can infect you, or, merely breathing near a spill can infect you, that material is to be considered a 6.2, infectious material, in Category A.
Back to the bat caves, and to the guano collected from them. If people have died from inhalation infections from merely walking on the bat shit, how should that guano be classified for transport in bags or drums? Yeah, that’s right, as 6.2 Category A. Who knew?
How many fertilizer sellers and distributors have Dangerous Goods classification training? I don’t know, but I think it’s a relevant question, because sometimes that shit’s hazardous!
This is the latest in a series of musings from the porch swing of Gene Sanders, principal of Tampa-based WE Train Consulting; telephone: (+1 813) 855 3855; email gene@wetrainconsulting.com.
IT CANNOT BE easy being a chemical tanker operator these days. Things may be picking up in market terms, with tonne-mile demand growing steadily and the orderbook overhang beginning to wind down, but the sector still faces competition from product tankers taking chemical and vegoil cargoes. In addition, there are some additional costs coming along that will likely hamper any recovery in profitability, even if freight rates improve.
Using figures from Drewry Shipping Consultants, Team Tankers International reports that the orderbook in the deepsea coated IMO II fleet has now shrunk to 3.8 per cent of the existing fleet, and in the 10,000 to 16,000-dwt range it is a very manageable 5.5 per cent. It is only in the stainless steel sector where the orderbook is still in double digits,
although the average age of this segment of the fleet is much higher so some demolition activity is likely.
But freight rates have been under pressure for so long now that it is tempting to wonder why owners stay in the game. As it happens, the past year has seen a number of owners, some of them long-term players in the chemical tanker business, selling up.
What has been noticeable about this year’s wave of takeovers and mergers is that the selling companies have not really been distressed – or, at least, not to the extent that Eitzen Chemical was when it was rescued from oblivion in 2015 in what was essentially a debt-for-equity swap deal.
Indeed, it is Eitzen’s successor company, Team Tankers, that kicked off 2018’s round of consolidation. Team Tankers, whose major shareholders are now JP Morgan Securities (29 per cent), Barclays Capital (28 per cent) and Euroclear Bank (13 per cent), acquired Laurin Shipping and Anglo-Atlantic Steamship in April, adding 14 medium-range (MR) tankers to its fleet.
The deal did more than expand the Team Tankers fleet; it brought Laurin’s in-house technical management capabilities and an experienced crew base. Since then, five vessels have been brought under in-house technical management, reducing costs and, Team says, this more integrated management arrangement should improve the overall technical performance of the fleet. In addition, Team Tankers has closed three offices, consolidating US chartering and operations activities in Houston and achieving annual cost savings of some $7m. This arrangement improves overhead costs per ship operating day, effectively reducing the breakeven point.
The other major acquisition took place right at the beginning of 2019, when MOL Chemical Tankers (MOLCT) announced it had agreed to »
buy Nordic Tankers from its sole shareholder, Triton Beratungsgesellschaft. The deal, which was expected to close this month, involves two similar fleets: both operate multi-segregation stainless steel chemical tankers, with a focus on contracts of affreightment (COAs). However, while MOLCT has 56 deepsea tankers in the global trades and another six smaller tankers employed within south-east Asia, Nordic is active in transatlantic and Latin American trades.
“We are really excited to acquire Nordic Tankers, which shall create a lot of synergies with MOLCT in the chemical tanker industry,” said Tsuneo Watanabe, CEO of MOLCT, when the deal was announced. “We are confident enough that the collaboration between MOLCT and Nordic Tankers should provide better and more efficient services to all existing customers. It should also create extra values to our customers, ship owners and other stakeholders, as well as management and employees of both companies.”
Per Sylvester Jensen, CEO of Nordic Tankers, added: “We are very pleased to get MOL Chemical Tankers as our new owners. MOLCT is a well-respected company with a successful history in the chemical tanker industry and a strong customer focus that mirrors Nordic Tankers’ strategy. We expect that the new owner will enhance Nordic Tankers’ ability even further in delivering exceptional value to our customers, owners, employees and other stakeholders and are looking forward to further grow and develop Nordic Tankers in a close partnership with MOL Chemical Tankers.”
Nordic Tankers, which will be renamed MOL Nordic Tankers A/S, was acquired by Triton in 2012; since then, it has gained a new management team, more vessels and had been participating in the consolidation process through the Crystal Nordic jointventure, which was sold separately in 2018.
“We would like to thank the management team, the employees and all other
stakeholders for their contributions to Nordic Tankers’ development during Triton’s ownership. We view this as an appropriate time for a long-term industrial owner to continue developing the company further,” says Peder Prahl, director of the General Partner to the Triton fund.
Regular readers may recall that MOLCT was formed in December 2016 through the amalgamation of Tokyo Marine Asia, a subsidiary of Mitsui OSK Lines, and Milestone Chemical Tankers, a pool established in 2013 by Tokyo Marine and Jo Tankers.
Late in 2018, brokers reported on two further major deals. Firstly, Chemikalien Seetransport (CST) acquired Rigel Schiffahrts in November. CST, part of the Hamburg-based Krämer Group, has 18 product tankers, three chemical tankers and one bulk carrier in its fleet. Bremen-based Rigel specialises in the technical management of product and chemical tankers and has a fleet of 11 tankers.
Speaking at the time of the deal, Chistian Krämer, CST chairman, said: “We are pleased to be able to expand our tanker fleet with the acquisition of Rigel. Rigel has an excellent reputation for the technical management
of product and chemical tankers, complementing our group very well.”
Rigel will continue to operate as an independent company, CST says. The company also says that it is aiming for “a sustained expansion and continued upgrading” of its own fleet over the next few years.
The second development, so far not completed, involves the sale by BW Group of its 13-strong chemical tanker fleet to Israeli owners Eastern Pacific Shipping and XT Shipping. The deal is said to be worth around $350m. BW Group currently operates its chemical tankers in Womar’s Stainless Tankers Inc pool, which has 30 ships of around 20,000 dwt each. The transaction is expected to see the vessels transfer to their new owner over the first half of 2019, at which point they will be entered in the Ace Quantum pool, which currently includes 23 similar tankers, many from Eastern Pacific.
The BW sale comes at the same time as it has restructured its activities in the product tanker sector, with BW Tankers merging with Hafnia Tankers and being renamed Hafnia, which remains part of the BW Group. HCB
THE 10TH CHEMICAL and Product Tanker Conference returns to London again this year, after a break in 2018. The conference, organised by Navigate Events on behalf of the International Parcel Tanker Association (IPTA), is the only meeting dedicated solely to the parcel tanker business and, as such, always reflects the important issues of the day for tanker operators and their customers. Perhaps not surprisingly, then, the agenda for this year’s conference, which takes place in the middle of London’s maritime industry at the Grange City Hotel on 5 and 6 March, leans heavily towards environmental issues. This reflects the focus being placed by the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) on reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions
from shipping activities, fuel and engine efficiency, and the reduction in sulphur emissions through the imposition of a 0.5 per cent limit on sulphur in fuel oil as from 1 January 2020 – the so-called ‘IMO 2020’ provision.
As ever, IPTA’s general manager, Janet Strode, will provide an update on the latest round of regulatory changes specific to parcel tankers, particularly the impending changes to Annex II of the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (Marpol) and related measures. That presentation will be supported by some illustrations of how techniques and services can be applied to help tanker operators meet the new requirements.
This year’s conference will also have a relatively short session on freight markets. Among the presentations will be one from regular speaker Hugo Finlay, formerly managing director of Essberger Tankers but now a consultant for Drewry. Looking at the freight markets, Matthew Stone of Prima Markets will the discuss the interesting potential for chemical tankers to enjoy a boost in demand from the need to move renewable diesel and other low-carbon fuels and feedstocks.
The IMO-generated focus on environmental matters does not impact the parcel tanker sector – or even the broader tanker industry – specifically. Indeed, as IPTA has pointed out before, some of the measures put in place in recent years have been designed with containerships in mind and the Association has had to lobby IMO to get it to take the needs of parcel tanker operators into account.
A good example of this is the Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI); Annex VI of Marpol requires that the attained EEDI of new ships must not exceed the set EEDI for their type and size. The required EEDI is determined according to a reference
line value representing the average EEDI of ships delivered between 1999 and 2009, with reduction factors applied in progressive phases. The current Phase 1 requires a 10 per cent reduction compared to the reference line; Phase 2 begins on January 2020, when the reduction factor falls to 20 per cent.
It has been suggested that since many ships already meet Phase 2 or 3 requirements, this indicates that the requirements are not stringent enough. Proposals have therefore been made to review and possibly bring forward the date of implementation of Phase 3 requirements, and to introduce a Phase 4 that would tighten up the requirements even further.
This is certainly one area where IPTA feels that the requirements have been established on the basis of the container shipping sector. Together with other associations, it pointed out to IMO’s Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) that, in the years up to 2009, tankers and bulk carriers were already designed for moderate service speeds and were provided with relatively low installed power relative to ship size. They therefore have limited potential to improve EEDI values by reducing installed power without risking the ships lacking sufficient propulsion and steering abilities to maintain manoeuvrability in adverse conditions.
While early implementation of Phase 3 would be feasible for some ship types and should be implemented, the Committee should avoid introducing impractical requirements for other ship types, and discussions of a possible Phase 4 should take into account the anticipated availability of alternative fuels, since this would be the only way for certain ship types to be able to meet the requirements.
IPTA is also concerned that there is a lack of verified data concerning EEDI values for new ships. Reporting of attained EEDI values is voluntary and, of the 850 tankers so far
delivered during Phase 1, EEDI values have been declared for only 140; it is worse in the bulk carrier sector, where there are EEDI values for 62 of the 1,100 newbuildings.
“This lack of verified data is a serious problem, meaning that analysts and decision-makers must calculate estimated index values that are subject to substantial uncertainty,” IPTA says. “This can lead to conclusions that may not be consistent with those that would be arrived at by the use of a complete data set and the potential for risky decisions to be made.”
IPTA and other associations have therefore proposed that the reporting of attained EEDI values by flag states should be made mandatory. The data that would be collected would greatly assist when it comes to considering a potential Phase 4.
The most common way for new ships to comply with EEDI requirements is by reducing installed power, but concerns have already been expressed about ships not having enough power to manoeuvre in certain conditions. MEPC has been asked to consider that, instead of reducing installed power, ships should be able to limit shaft power in order to comply with EEDI, but be able to ‘unlimit’ in circumstances where extra power is required for the safety of the ship, for instance in adverse weather.
Interim guidelines were developed in 2013 as a direct consequence of the introduction of the EEDI and remain the only regulatory instrument addressing the important safety issue of ensuring that ships have enough power to manoeuvre safely in adverse conditions. Work is underway to finalise this guidance but the establishment of adequate reference weather conditions for the determination of the minimum required propulsion power is a complex issue and finalisation is taking longer than anticipated.
The IMO 2020 deadline is also not a specific issue for the chemical tanker sector but operators will have to deal with it. In fact, according to recent research by Drewry Maritime Research, they have some way to go, and with less than a year left.
Drewry says that only 21 vessels in the chemical tanker fleet have had scrubbers installed, with another 76 due to have retrofits in place by the end of the year; that leaves 98 per cent of the fleet not covered. While some more may be retrofitted over the course of 2019, there is inevitably going to be competition for yard space and supplies of suitable equipment. Those without scrubbers will, after 1 January 2020, have to burn more expensive low-sulphur fuel oil. »
There is an alternative: to switch to other fuels such as LNG, LPG or methanol. While some newbuildings have been designed to be able to do that, the cost of retrofitting is high. Again, Drewry says that only 18 chemical tankers – all coated units and mostly in the 40,000 to 55,000 dwt segment – have dual-fuel engines capable of running on LNG. There are also a handful of chemical tankers capable of burning methanol, although these are mostly dedicated methanol carriers.
For most chemical tanker operators, then, it is looking inevitable that their fuel costs will increase significantly. Given current market dynamics, Drewry thinks it unlikely that they will be able to fully pass on those costs, suggesting that profitability will continue to be squeezed in 2020, just at the point when operators were optimistic that vessel supply and demand would be coming back into balance and support an improvement in rates.
While the maritime industry understands IMO’s action on sulphur emissions, it does seem that the use of different fuels will generate technical problems that have not really been allowed for in the IMO plan. For instance, MEPC has recently been working to draw up an implementation plan to assist shipowners in planning for the changeover. This will cover considerations such as risk assessments, the need for modifications to the fuel system, the capability to segregate fuels of different specification, the procurement of compliant fuel, documentation and reporting. In addition, fuel tanks will need to be cleaned before 0.5 per cent sulphur fuel is bunkered for the first time.
It is also far from clear whether compliant fuel will be available at all bunkering ports on 1 January 2020. IMO has accepted that this is a possibility and is working on a ‘Fuel Oil Non-Availability Report’ (FONAR) form. This
will not provide an exemption and it seems likely that ship operators will be expected to bunker whatever low-sulphur fuel is available. This could mean dealing with differing viscosities and sulphur contents, which may require different lube oils, heating or other onboard handling.
If no compliant fuel can be taken onboard and a vessel has to use non-compliant fuel, what then happens when the vessel arrives at a port where it can bunker compliant fuel? Is any remaining non-compliant fuel to be de-bunkered? Will the bunker tanks have to be cleaned again? Then there is the issue of providing a sampling point so that Port State Control inspectors can take samples of in-use fuel; MEPC has agreed draft amendments that will require existing ships to have a sampling point fitted no later than the first renewal survey after the entry-intoforce of the amendments, which is expected to be in 2021. »
A number of potential safety issues have been identified in relation to very low sulphur fuels. These include flashpoint, cold flow properties, Cat Fines, stability and compatibility of the various blended low sulphur fuels that are coming into the market. With regard to this last point, it was pointed out that many suppliers are reluctant even to confirm that supplies of the same product produced in different parts of the world would be compatible. Testing kits that are currently available are not necessarily suitable for testing the new products, although ISO has advised that, even if they are not working properly they would be more likely to produce a false negative than a false positive, thus maintaining a safety margin.
IMO’s Maritime Safety Committee will be looking at some of these safety issues and industry associations are currently preparing guidance to highlight the potential risks and recommend mitigation measures.
An issue of more specific relevance to the chemical tanker industry concerns the latest round of amendments to the International Code for the Construction and Equipment of Ships Carrying Dangerous Chemicals in Bulk (IBC Code). At its meeting in April 2018, MEPC adopted a new model form of the International Certificate of Fitness for the Carriage of Dangerous Chemicals in Bulk. The adopted revision focuses on the loading and stability information booklet and
introduces a new paragraph 7 containing directions for the conditions under which ships must be loaded.
IMO’s Working Group on the Evaluation of Safety and Pollution Hazards (ESPH) has been looking at renewable and ‘energyrich’ fuels, the latter being a sub-group of renewable fuels derived from plant-based material but by a different process. They are comprised only of constituents that can be expressed as individual hydrocarbon chemicals. ESPH has identified a list of seven such alkanes, which will appear in the new Annex 12 of MEPC.2/Circ; they will be removed from Annex II (biofuels) and List 1, meaning they will no longer be able to be carried as Annex II products but must be shipped under Annex I.
ESPH has also agreed that the entries for paraffins in Chapter 17 of the IBC Code should be amended, with four new entries:
• n-Alkanes (C10-C20)
• Paraffin wax, highly refined
• Paraffin wax, semi-refined
• Hydrocarbon wax.
The first two will be subject to the new Category Y prewash requirements, while the second two will be recategorized to pollution category X.
IPTA says that, strictly speaking, the current IBC Code names and requirements will remain until a new edition of the IBC Code is issued in 2020. However, some shippers or operators may wish to apply the revised carriage requirements earlier than that.
Indeed, IPTA says, that is already happening, with the consequence that some operators are having difficulty finding reception facilities at discharge ports. There is also a question as to who is liable for arranging and paying for a prewash when it is not yet mandatory.
This issue has been further complicated by the policy adopted by the Netherlands authorities in relation to the discharge of paraffin wax in Rotterdam and Moerdijk. An agreement has been reached with the principal Dutch shipper of paraffin wax to compensate them for the costs of a prewash following discharge of paraffin wax, providing the prewash is carried out according to a methodology prescribed by them that is more rigorous than that set out in Marpol Annex II. This agreement is intended to cover the period until the changes come into force and will then expire.
It is unclear, IPTA says, whether this means the Netherlands is formally applying the revised names and categories for waxes in advance of the entry-into-force date. If it is, then the compensation agreement will not apply to the Category Y waxes and there will be cost implications. HCB
This is just one of a number of complex and fluid provisions that affects all chemical tanker operators. Those who attend the Chemical and Product Tanker Conference next month will come away with the latest information. Full details about the event can be found at https:// cpt-conference.com.
REGULATIONS • WITH A BROAD ENVIRONMENTAL REMIT, IMO’S MEPC IS MAKING PROGRESS ON EMISSIONS REDUCTION, VESSEL EFFICIENCY AND REVISION OF THE IBC CODE
systems, while recognising that further changes are needed to the International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships’ Ballast Water and Sediments in light of experience.
Aside from these high-profile discussions, MEPC also looked in detail at some issues of more specific importance to operators of chemical and product tankers. In particular, it approved draft amendments to Annex II of the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution by Ships (Marpol) to strengthen, in specified sea areas, discharge requirements for tank washings containing persistent floating products with a high-viscosity and/or a high melting point that can solidify under certain conditions. Such products include, for instance, certain vegetable oils and paraffin-like cargoes.
The draft amendments follow concerns about the environmental impact of permissible discharges of such products and would tighten requirements for the discharge from ships of tank washings containing such products.
THE INTERNATIONAL MARITIME Organisation’s (IMO) Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) held its 73rd session in London from 22 to 26 October 2018. Much of the work undertaken at the meeting related to anti-pollution programmes that are hogging the headlines these days, not least the looming implementation of the 0.5 per cent limit on sulphur in ships’ bunkers from 1 January 2020 and the issue of plastics pollution in the oceans.
In terms of the sulphur cap, MEPC adopted an amendment that will prohibit the carriage of non-compliant fuel oil for combustion purposes unless the ship has
an exhaust gas cleaning system (scrubber) fitted. It also approved guidelines for vessel owners and bunker fuel suppliers. It also responded to IMO’s agreement that the Sub-Committee on Pollution Prevention and Response (PPR) should develop a ban on heavy fuel oil for use and carriage as fuel by ships in Arctic waters, based on an assessment of the impacts of such a ban. PPR is due to consider the issue at its sixth session this month. The use and carriage of heavy fuel oil is already banned in the Antarctic and it is recommended in the Polar Code that the same rules are applied in Arctic waters.
In addition, MEPC approved a programme of actions to implement IMO’s strategy on greenhouse gas emissions reductions, examined the next phases of implementation of the Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI), and made further progress on guidance on the approval of ballast water management
MEPC also approved draft amendments to the International Code for the Construction and Equipment of Ships carrying Dangerous Chemicals in Bulk (IBC Code), including the draft revised chapters 17 (Summary of minimum requirements), 18 (List of products to which the code does not apply), 19 (Index of Products Carried in Bulk) and 21 (Criteria for assigning carriage requirements for products subject to the IBC Code). These draft amendments are expected to be adopted in 2019, with the next edition of the IBC Code scheduled for publication in 2020.
These draft amendments were also approved by IMO’s Maritime Safety Committee (MSC), which held its 100th session in London in early December. That meeting also approved a number of amendments and guidelines produced by the Sub-committee on Carriage of Cargoes and Containers at its session in September 2018, particularly those relating to ships using methanol/ethanol or gases or other low-flashpoint fuels in their propulsion systems. HCB
substances in holds and tanks that could affect the quality of the products and could be life-threatening.
ITAMA system is the integration between marine tank management and key aspects of tank maintenance such as tank cleaning machines to improve safety and achieve faster turnaround times.
Quality control was a pre-requisite in bringing the new end-to-end solution to the market. Manufactured in-house by Scanjet to assure product reliability and performance, ITAMA creates advantages for ship owners and operators alike by taking advantages of the synergies between products while achieving 100 per cent compatibility.
Developed to provide reliable operation in harsh marine environments. ITAMA has been designed as a modular platform, bringing together embedded proprietary software, operating system and hardware to create a fully integrated system that delivers information direct to the ship’s automatic systems.
The system supports multiple PC Workstations (master and/or slave). Userfriendly touch-screen system display units show only active tanks ‘in action’ while local indicators and a new handheld ATEX-certified Wireless Tank Monitoring and Alarm Unit provide additional viewing options. ITAMA additionally provides support for ship-to-shore transmissions and remote support via ship’s internet connection.
LEGISLATION REQUIRES THAT hazardous cargoes are tracked and monitored at every stage both on land and at sea. In addition to the comprehensive data capture and recording requirements carriers face, stringent new laws and regulations have been introduced in the past ten years aimed at offsetting incidents arising at sea and during loading and unloading. Continuous monitoring is essential to prevent and control leaks and spills and to avoid the build-up of toxic
Going forward, the pressure is on to deliver smarter, more flexible monitoring solutions to achieve cost-effective ship management. For shipbuilders, scalability and adaptability are vital in meeting changing market demands. For owners and carriers, the synergies among the related products are key to achieving operating economies and maintaining vessel compliance with new regulations as they emerge. The growing move towards ship autonomy, although still some way off, has placed additional emphasis on the digitisation of ship systems
Unique in the market, the Intelligent Tank Management (ITAMA) approach provides direct, real-time monitoring and measurement covering all aspects of tank management to ensure safe operations and control at sea and in port. Central to the
Adding in flexibility was also an important outcome for this next-generation approach. ITAMA provides the capability to add or remove monitoring points, accommodating a virtually unlimited number and types of instruments. This includes full connectivity and data transfer with third-party products and automation systems. The system has been designed to be future-proof, offering lifetime full reverse compatibility of parts and components – allowing for ease of upgrading to meet new standards and regulations, as well as changing requirements.
ITAMA covers a wide scope of operational areas, comprising automatic tank monitoring alarm and control and measurement, fixed and portable tank cleaning, and inert gas systems.
The Scanjet tank measurement technology is based on high frequency non-contact radars or high-accuracy temperature compensated absolute pressure sensors, or both in combination, to measure liquid density measurement online. Temperatures can be monitored at multiple points, with readings used to automatically recalculate the specific gravity of the liquid as a function of the temperature.
Proprietary mathematical algorithms integrated within the system filter out instrument fluctuations and compensate for the effects of tank liquid movement arising from pitch and roll, additionally avoiding false alarms. Temperatures can be measured at multiple points, with readings used to automatically recalculate the Specific Gravity of the liquid as a function of the temperature.
A separate service for non-contact tank calibration ensures accurate tank volume charts. The system thus enables reliable reconciliation between level (ullage) and weight measurements at any trim or list.
Tank level gauging is provided by an electro pneumatic system offering continuous, fast measurement, transmitting data to the relevant systems via with DC 4-20 mA or digital Modbus serial line.
Suitable for permanent submersed operation, ITAMA’s pressure sensors measure absolute pressure. The system control panel features continuous and simultaneous digital readout of each measuring point as well as user-defined visual and audible fixed and user-defined alarms. Continuous corrections of the level readings for the vessel’s trim and list and a transmitter for system atmospheric pressure compensation are included with the system. Serial line communication to other systems is available via RS485, RS422, RS232 and TCP/IP.
Providing additional safety for inland and chemical carriers and offshore supply vessels, Scanjet’s Feen IGS Nitrogen Generator System creates a pure, dry and contamination-free nitrogen gas membrane for the protection of cargo, eliminating the risk of tank explosions during tank cleaning and cargo discharge.
Scanjet has its roots in the supply of tank cleaning equipment and offers fixed and portable tank cleaning equipment to suit a wide variety of installations, with numerous installations for chemical tanker operators
including Stolt Tankers, Odfjell and Utkilen. Integrating tank cleaning with cargo tank monitoring optimises cleaning process times and reduces the use of tank cleaning water and boiler fuel. It also provides automated tank cleaning reports. Tank cleaning machines may be equipped with a sensor that connects to the tank radar gauge, which transfers data to the central workstation via a Supply and Communications unit. Providing information in real time, this also eliminating the need for extra cabling.
Designed as a dedicated concept to support all types of vessel and offer maximum flexibility, continuous improvement and development ensures ITAMA is constantly evolving to meet changing market demands and issues as they emerge.
For vessels due for upgrades, integrated solutions like ITAMA offer a fast, economic alternative to replacing individual elements, where issues with compatibility or obsolescence can lead to unexpected extra costs. In most cases, upgrades and refits are done without the need for hot work onboard. For newbuilds also, installing an integrated system eliminates problems from the outset while offering the added benefit of automation and seamless integration. With compatibility assured, and all interfaces accommodated in the system design, there is minimal or no need for specialist engineering input, saving time and money.
Integration has also been shown to minimise lifetime maintenance costs, with single source supply providing a faster response for spares and service support and evidence of compliance with all recognised class requirements – often a condition of contract for oil companies. HCB www.scanjet.se
THE INTERNATIONAL MARITIME Organisation’s (IMO) new restrictions on sulphur oxide emissions come into effect on 1 January 2020 and shipowners around the world are working hard to find their preferred method of meeting them. However, their ability to prove compliance has so far not been so well addressed.
Since 2015, three Denmark-based companies, Danfoss IXA, Dania Ship Management and Nordic Tankers (now MOL Nordic Tankers), have been cooperating on developing and validating an innovative technology to monitor emissions on a continuous basis. The result is, they say, “a front-runner solution to ensure global enforcement of the IMO’s requirements for
sulphur emissions way before any legislation is pushed through”.
Per Sylvester Jensen, CEO of chemical tanker operator Nordic Tankers, says: “The sensor equipment from Danfoss IXA is an innovative piece of technology that enables ship owners to continuously prove compliance with the IMO’s requirements for sulphur emissions. At Nordic Tankers, together with our partners, we aim to be front-runners in supporting the development of our industry worldwide. The cooperation with Danfoss IXA on testing the new solution is an interesting project for us.”
The sensor technology was tested on the 19,355-dwt chemical tanker Nordic Mari, owned by Nordic Tankers and managed by Dania Ship Management. “The equipment
is well designed and was delivered to the Nordic Mari as a complete product,” says Carsten Brix Ostenfeldt, CEO of Dania Ship Management. “In the beginning of the test period, the durability of the sensor was challenged by the very toxic and harsh environment in which it was placed, but these problems have been solved by Danfoss IXA.”
“The technology makes it possible to document how much your ships are emitting worldwide, and the data is sent directly to you ashore,” Ostenfeldt continues. “This means we can prove compliance at any time and, once the development picks up speed, we will be ready and one step ahead of the rest of the industry.
“Our next target is to compare the readings onboard Nordic Mari with other external readings, for example the sensor fitted on the Great Belt Bridge in Denmark. The sensor on the bridge is first and foremost fitted to ensure compliance with Danish and global legislation, but over time such technology will also ensure a level playing field, which we support as a principle for doing business today.”
Besides monitoring emissions on an ongoing basis and proving compliance, the sensor technology also has enabled Dania Ship Management to track how the engines are performing by reading out the data from the vessel. “As a general rule, change in the shipping industry is driven by legislation. But if the sensor technology is following the development of electronically controlled engines, you will be able to continuously optimise combustion and cut fuel costs. This could be a future incentive for change as well,” says Ostenfeldt.
The sensors provided for the project by Danfoss IXA measure emissions of sulphur dioxide, nitrogen oxides and ammonia, while a cloud-based solution can make that data immediately available both to shipowners and managers and to the authorities. The monitoring equipment is now being installed on a number of newbuild vessels and, say the project partners, can be retrofitted to existing vessels within 24 hours. HCB www.danfoss-ixa.com www.daniashipmanagement.com www.nordictankers.com
of composite hoses and puts safety at the forefront, Dantec has designed and developed the first ever Composite Hose Bend Limiter - Dan Pro~Tec BL. This innovative product fixes to the outside of the composite hose on the first string at either the tank or shipside, adding support to the hose and eliminating the over-flexing and bending that causes the damage.
“We firmly believe this first member of the Dan Pro~Tec family will further enhance the benefits of using composite hoses whilst addressing the most common failure mode,” says John Laidlaw, managing director of Dantec. “Trials in selected UK terminals have shown the BL150 to be extremely robust and – after some adjustments were made following valuable feedback – user friendly. The fact that it is completely reusable and transferable to any replacement hoses in the future makes the initial investment extremely worthwhile. The addition of handles has also improved the safety value of the product as the user can now lift the hose into place with straps, without causing any strain to the hose or the flange connection.”
inner and outer wire helix, the hose has a long shelf life and high safety factor.
The only serious issue with composite hoses is that they can be damaged. Nevertheless, most end users feel the benefits of composite hoses outweigh the negatives, and their worldwide use is at an all-time high.
The BL removes the strain from the fixed transition area and allows the hose to bend naturally further along its length. The BL, made from polyurethane, flexes with the hose while taking the strain and loosens again once the hose is relaxed. There is no requirement for it to be permanently fixed to one hose, so once purchased it can be easily moved and remounted on whichever hose is in use at a given time.
FOR MANY OF those involved in the transfer of bulk liquids products at the ship/shore interface, the composite hose is the go-to piece of equipment. Its key benefit over other types of hose and over loading arms is that it is lightweight, highly flexible and can be used for multiple purposes. Being manufactured from multi-layers of thermoplastics and an
Dantec, a world leader in composite technology, has worked closely with its customers and quality assurance departments and has found that 70 per cent of composite hose failures result from a lack of support at the critical termination point. This causes overflexing and bending of the hose in the transition area between the relatively soft, pliable hose wall and the hard end-connection area.
Being fully focused on developing a costeffective solution that increases the longevity
Having performed extensive, extreme over-flexing, bending and even half-tonne strain tests on the product, Dantec has proved that the concept works. The Pro~Tec BL150 is initially available in a 6-inch model for use at the jetty; an 8-inch model for ship-to-ship transfers is due to follow soon.
To ensure safe practice and to add longevity to the hoses Dantec supplies, a hose handling guide detailing storage, testing and inspection guidelines is included with every one of its large bore hoses. HCB www.dantec.com
Sirius Shipping has taken delivery of Mercurius, the second of two 8,000-dwt Evolutionconcept chemical tankers ordered from AVIC Dingheng. As with the first in the series, Saturnus, delivered last November, the new vessel has been designed for the best possible hydrodynamic effect in the water, together with a slow-speed diesel engine that reduces emissions to the lowest extent possible. Both were also designed to be able to be fitted with LNG propulsion.
Delivery of the pair marks the culmination of six years’ work. “Standing here today on the day of delivery we can conclude that our objectives with the Evolution concept has been fulfilled,” said Jonas Backman, managing director of Sirius Shipping, when Saturnus was completed. “The ship design in combination with the engine type makes for a very fuel-efficient ship that offers both environmental and financial benefits.”
Sirius has, together with leading oil companies, developed the Evolution concept
with the aim of building a vessel that fulfils customers’ requirements, in terms of both capacity and environmental impact. “The goal was to create the most efficient logistical solution for the customer and I think that this goal has been achieved,” said Backman. www.siriusshipping.eu
Evergas is reported to have sold its entire fleet of ethylene-capable gas carriers to partners in the Unigas consortium. The eight vessels are said to have changed hands for a total of $200m. They have been operating in the E3 pool, formed by Evergas and Eletson in early 2017, but, according to reports, Evergas has been unable to make the operation financially successful.
It is understood that the eight vessels will be delivered to Unigas between February and September. Of the three partners in the Unigas consortium, Ultragas and Schulte will take three each and Sloman Neptun two. www.evergas.net
German shipowner Gefo has ordered two-option-two 7,000-dwt stainless steel chemical tankers at AVIC Dingheng in China. The vessels, based on a design by FKAB, will be rated ice class 1A for use in the Baltic and will be equipped with a dual-fuel engine capable of running on LNG.
Deliveries are due to start in 2021, following on from six 3,600-dwt chemical tankers ordered in March 2018 from the same yard, which are due for delivery in 2020 and 2021. www.gefo.com
The International Tanker Owners Pollution Federation (ITOPF), in its annual survey, recorded only three tanker spills of more than 700 tonnes in 2018, and another three medium spills of between 7 and 700 tonnes. Those numbers continue the trend of the past eight years, which has averaged 6.4 spills over 7 tonnes each year.
However, the loss of the tanker Sanchi and its cargo of condensate in January 2018 resulted in a spill of 113,000 tonnes, pushing the annual total of oil lost to 118,000 tonnes, the highest figure since 1994. “The number of oil spills involving tankers remains low despite a general increase in oil trading over the years,” ITOPF notes, citing the work that tanker owners and governments have done to improve safety and standards of operation in seaborne oil transport. www.itopf.org
The Oil Companies International Marine Forum (OCIMF) has decided to open up access to Tanker Management and Self Assessment (TMSA) reports to non-OCIMF members as from 14 January. Until now, access was restricted but non-members that are registered as Ship Inspection Report (SIRE) Programme recipients are now permitted to request vessel operators’ permission to view
their TMSA reports. SIRE vessel operators will maintain control over which SIRE recipients can see those reports.
“This major change will mean more information is available to more users, which will help improve overall safety and marine assurance,” OCIMF says.
The TMSA system was originally introduced in 2004 as a way to help companies assess, measure and improve their management systems with the aim of attaining the highest standards of safety. TMSA is available as a printed book and an online tool and is now in its third edition, published in 2017.
OCIMF has also published an information paper on technologies and methods currently available for controlling volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from cargo systems on oil tankers, both during loading and in transit. The paper summarises the relevant regulations, training requirements and design and installation conditions. The paper can be downloaded free of charge from the OCIMF website, www.ocimf.org.
Team Tankers International reported thirdquarter EBITDA of $0.7m, compared to $4.6m a year earlier, and a net loss of $14.5m in what CEO Hans Feringa called a “challenging freight market”.
The results came at a time of adjustment following the acquisition of the Anglo-Atlantic Steamship and Laurin Shipping operations;
during the third quarter Team closed the legacy operations in Sweden and consolidated vessel management in the Americas at its Houston office. Following the acquisition, Team Tankers now has 51 vessels in the water: 38 coated tankers in deepsea and regional trades, plus 13 stainless steel tankers, chartered in, employed on regional trades.
Team Tankers lifted more cargo and had more trading days compared to the second quarter, but timecharter equivalent earnings continued to slide, with average daily rates falling from $11,316 in the second quarter to $9,758. www.teamtankers.com
Thun Tankers has named its latest newbuilding, Thun Evolve, at the Ferus Smit yard in Groningen, the Netherlands. The 8,000-dwt ice class 1A tanker can use LNG or liquefied biogas (LBG) as fuel and includes design elements to improve efficiency and reduce environmental impact. On delivery in March it will go onto a long-term charter to Preem for use in fuel distribution around Scandinavia.
“
Thun Evolve has been built with the latest design to meet and exceed current and upcoming environmental regulations,” says CCO Joakim Lund. “It meets high standards of safety, efficiency with a very l ow environmental impact, and can be powered by LNG or LBG.”
Fredrik Backman, head of the shipping department at Preem, adds: “Our maritime transport is an important part of Preem’s operations. We are therefore very pleased with the company’s latest addition of new environmentally adapted tankers, using the latest hull design for improved performance, lower fuel consumption and reduced emissions. It is also in line with Preem’s high-end sustainability requirements.”
Thun Evolve is the second of four E-class tankers building at Ferus Smit; the first, Thun Eos, was delivered last year. www.thuntankers.com
As Europe’s leading annual chemical supply chain forum, LogiChem will this year address those trends, while offering a platform for discussion and opportunities for those on all sides of the logistics chain to get together and meet their peers and counterparts. The three-day event kicks off on 19 March at the Grand Hotel Krasnapolsky in Amsterdam and will feature more than 50 presentations by industry experts.
ACCORDING TO A white paper published by WBR in 2017, the global market for chemicals is expected to more than double by 2035, growing to a value of €5.6tr. Within that, the chemical logistics function is seen as a business enabler, to drive performance and maximise growth.
At the same time, advances in digitised technology are opening up new ways of connecting, new ways of doing business, and new opportunities to identify and remove inefficiencies in the supply chain.
Among those speakers will be Jens-Mario Burggraf, supply chain, logistics and client service leader at Braskem, who will talk about how to implement a blockchain solution within logistics to provide more transparency on product shipments. Blockchain technology is beginning to emerge as a driving force in the chemicals industry and its benefits are becoming increasingly more obvious. The interactive case study presentation will look at where the real advantage is coming from and what impact blockchain technology will have on the entire supply chain.
On a similar theme, Heinz-Günter Lux, sensor digital strategist at Evonik, will be addressing the topic of how to turn market disruption into a competitive advantage. Lux will speak about the five biggest digital trends that companies should look out for in order to stay ahead of the curve, as well as ways to initiate and accelerate the implementation of blockchain technology to optimise the flow of trade documentation.
Global chemical production and demand are running at record levels, which is good news for industry but places significant strains on logistics providers, who sometimes struggle to keep up. Day two of LogiChem will highlight methods of overcoming capacity constraints, with presentations from leading logistics players. Lars Koppelmann, vice-president of supply chain management and logistics procurement EMEA at Ineos Styrolution, will discuss how to reduce the negative impact of operating constraints such as restricted logistics capacities and the limited and ageing workforce in a highly dynamic market impacted by trade wars and digitisation.
Matthias Ulrich, chassis systems control, senior project manager at Robert Bosch, will be examining how to use driver assistance systems and automated driving vehicles to increase the efficiency of logistics operations.
Francois Zehr, global transportation and logistics director at Cabot Corp, will address the best options for incentivising carriers to increase their performance and transport capacity in the tendering process.
Day three of the conference will look at the future of the chemical logistics sector and how it can make positive changes to supply chains through the use of a digital, customer-centric approach, drawing on lessons learned from major crises in recent history to plan for the next disruption. Lanny Duvall, chief supply chain officer at Nouryon, will paint a picture of how he thinks supply chains will look in ten years’ time, against a backdrop of rapid advances in digital technology and rising customer expectations.
Sustainability, a topic that goes handin-hand with digitisation, also plays a key role in the way we approach topics such as automation and the digital supply chain. Steven Beddegenoodts, global EHS and sustainability lead for the petrochemical supply chain at Sabic, will concentrate on the importance of implementing a sustainable supply chain strategy to meet stakeholders’ increasing expectation and that offers more than just ‘greenwashing’.
With a changing landscape of stakeholders and emerging technologies with the digital space, which technologies offer the best prospects for increasing endto-end supply chain visibility? Delegates will get the opportunity to join Florian Kache, head of supply chain innovation management at BASF, Guillermo Fumero, former global business services leader Clariant and founder at Extheria, and Marc van der Veen, associate director for supply chain innovation at Dow Dupont, who make up the ‘Dragons’ Den’ panel that will assess the latest innovations from start-up companies who will be pitching their tech in a bid to win first place. This exciting change to the regular panel discussions will give delegates the power to vote for their favourite pieces of tech and discover new and potential benefits to future business practices.
Alongside the conference, LogiChem also hosts an exhibition where companies can showcase solutions and run product demos. LogiChem 2019 will play host to more than 350 chemical supply chain professionals, all of whom will have the opportunity to take part in 12 hours of networking opportunities.
One of this year’s exhibitors, Ion Group, will be showcasing WAM’s enterprise resource planning (ERP) solution. The WAM supply chain planning (SCP) solution provides global visibility to inventories, trades, orders, distribution, production schedules and demand forecasts, and allows users to plan performance across a given enterprise.
The aim of its new ERP solution is to enhance the supply chain by providing integrated business planning, sales and operation planning, demand planning, production and distribution scheduling, and inventory optimisation.
Globalisation, intensifying competition, industry consolidation, and deteriorating margins create unique, ongoing challenges. Companies active in the process industries need support systems that enhance supply chain decision making and deliver a competitive advantage through improved profitability, market share and customer responsiveness. The WAM SCP solution closes the loop between planning, scheduling and
execution to enable increased agility and opportunity for profit maximisation, according to the company.
Odyssey, a global leader in chemical logistics solutions, will be previewing its range of intermodal, trucking and webintegrated network (WIN) solutions, as well as services from its subsidiary companies CMC and LLC. Trucking costs often consume the largest portion of transportation budgets, according to the company. Odyssey’s trucking solutions include less-than-truckload, truckload, bulk tank truck and flatbed and warehousing, all of which make use of the company’s client selfserviced transport management system. In addition, Odyssey offers intermodal solutions for clients seeking a cost-effective mode of transport for all types of commodities. Odyssey can manage all aspects of transport from cargo planning to freight audit and payment, and management reports, bolstering its position within the industry as a one-stop shop for chemical logistics.
With its impressive list of speakers and array of sponsors, it is expected that LogiChem will, as key industry influencers, once again lead the way through inciting change and innovation. Full information on the event can be found at logichem.wbresearch.com. HCB
OVER THE PAST few years, the annual LogiChem event has accurately reflected –and even predicted – changes in the chemical supply chain being brought about by the increasing application of new information technologies. This year’s LogiChem, which takes place in Amsterdam on 19 to 21 March, looks set to continue that tradition, facilitating an ongoing conversation about the tools that exist to open up the implementation of digitally enabled systems in the sector, as well as address the problems and fears that are holding industry back.
Ahead of the meeting, WBR, LogiChem’s organiser, partnered with Alpega Group to survey 100 senior logistics executives in chemical companies across Europe to find out more about the challenges they are facing and the innovative
solutions that are being brought to the table to help them address those challenges. It is not all about digitisation, of course – there are plenty of existing and emerging commercial challenges to be faced, but individuals working in the chemical supply chain are coming to expect the same levels of visibility and reliability that they now take for granted in the consumer sphere.
Introducing the results of the survey, which was carried out in late 2018, Carolyn Hunt, senior segment manager at Alpega Group, explains some of the current stresses. “Firstly, buyers are becoming more demanding and, secondly, they are increasingly outsourcing to cheaper markets. That leaves business leaders with an interesting quandary: how to increase customer satisfaction without raising prices.”
In this new, highly connected world, the key items for those leading the logistics function in chemical companies are price (as ever), reliability, quick delivery and visibility.
“These are all areas where the sector has made relatively slow progress,” Hunt says.
“The rise of customer-focused business models has led to increased expectations for the chemical sector. Buyers want to see operations that give them not only full visibility, but also confidence that they have the best possible product at the best possible price, exactly when they need it. This shift to customer-centricity requires some upfront investment, especially in a sector hamstrung by legacy systems.”
The ubiquity of enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems is, Hunt feels, something of fig leaf covering up fundamental weaknesses. “ERP systems often propose a basic framework, and although they are a step in the right direction, they cannot meet the unique needs of the industry,” she says. “Managing complex capacity, planning and handling requirements is simply outside of their scope.” And that is before taking account of the very special safety and regulatory compliance issues that are a feature of the chemical industry. »
Getting the talent needed to lead this transformation is another challenge. “Finding innovative employees who are willing to take on a technology shift is critical,” Hunt says. “Attracting these people requires the sector as a whole to reconsider the image it projects and engage with more women and millennials, while making the most of the knowledge held in its current workforce.”
“It’s an exciting time for the chemical industry and there are plenty of opportunities for forward-thinking managers,” Hunt observes. This is especially true of those who are willing to embrace technology as an enabler for growth and promote better collaboration within the supply chain ecosystem.
Access to talent is a big issue, particularly as new business models will lean heavily on non-traditional skill sets. Of those surveyed, 39 per cent felt that the biggest challenge to recruiting the best talent is the nature of the chemical logistics industry itself. “The sector clearly needs to work on its image and highlight the numerous factors that make it an exciting proposition for new and experienced workers,” says Hunt.
“That said,” she continues, “leading businesses work hard to retain the best talent and have reshaped working patterns to appeal to new generations.” For instance, flexible working appeals particularly to millennials and women – and these are to key talent pools that the sector needs to embrace.
The other issue that the chemical logistics sector has to deal with in terms of attracting talent is that the skills that it needs are the same skills that other industry sectors are seeking and competition is fierce. “Top-level talent is more likely to be attracted to other industries like FMCG, as their supply chain methods are more advanced,” says Fabian
Gasczak, head of SCM polyols and oxidation products at Lanxess. “The chemical industry is just starting to evolve from a logistics function to a supply chain function.”
While access to talent is a barrier to rapid implementation of digitised systems, the biggest hurdle the industry faces lies in the legacy systems it is still working with. Of those surveyed, 43 cent cited this as the biggest problem.
“Legacy systems are a big challenge for chemical manufacturers to overcome,” says Hunt. “Effective change management and a true commitment from the organisation are absolutely essential if legacy systems and processes are to be replaced with more efficient digital ones.”
“It’s necessary to get a consultant company to provide you the right solutions according to your unique situation,” adds Joan Manel Azuaga, global demand inventory manager at Clariant. “The main obstacles are a lack of investment, not having enough people to manage the change, and the difficulty of changing a big company.”
Chemical companies do not work in a vacuum and, as the growing use of the term ‘ecosystem’ to describe the supply chain shows, they have to interact with other players,
particularly their logistics service providers (LSPs) and the third- and fourth-party logistics (3PL/4PL) companies that follow in their wake. But, as the survey indicates, developing a strategic relationship with those logistics providers is the biggest challenge in terms of supply chain management.
“Getting more strategic relationships with logistics partners is on the minds of many – and it’s a key issue that can be aided by technology,” Hunt notes. “Carrier scorecards and real-time feedback from analytics that come out of a transport management system (TMS) can help guide the discussion and get to the heart of what needs to change.”
But it is clear that there is no ‘one size fits all’ solution to developing such relationships, something that further hampers the application of standardised systems. While 31 per cent of the logistics leaders surveyed said that developing strategic relationships with their 3PLs and 4PLs was their biggest challenge, 27 per cent said it was the need to develop and prepare back-up plans in case of logistics disruptions and capacity limitations, and another 24 per cent identified the need to optimise service levels to increase customer satisfaction and loyalty.
“There are many important features we look for in a 3PL, including flexibility, cost, long-term agreements, professional »
processes, stability and the ability to attract employees in a difficult environment (e.g. lack of truck drivers),” says Gasczak, while Azuaga explains: “We have different scenarios depending on the country. In some we manage everything, while in others we employ a third party to handle the storage and preparation of goods. However, the documentation is always handled by our central team who are in contact with the transport providers.”
Capacity constraints and logistics interruptions are other factors that prevent full automation of the logistics process. Only 32 per cent of those surveyed said they have no issues with deliveries and 23 per cent said there were only occasional bottlenecks. By contrast, 40 per cent said that they spend more time than they would like organising last-minute alternatives, and in total 62 per cent said they have already or are currently looking to diversify their 3PL base.
“If VPs of supply chain are looking to diversify their 3PL base, it’s necessary to prepare an in-depth analysis of the cost involved,” Azuaga recommends. “Prepare one strategy with a
timeline and have different offers on the table. Before deciding anything, revise the result considering all the pros and cons.”
“The disruption caused by the Rastatt tunnel collapse in August 2017 was unprecedented and underlines the importance of effective contingency planning and risk management,” Hunt says. “Having an agile supply chain is pivotal to dealing with this type of incident, as is having a sustainable Plan B. This type of preparedness often translates to a competitive advantage when something goes wrong.”
A Plan B can be quite different to Plan A, as Gasczak observes: “In the future we plan to implement more intermodal transportation to compensate for bad infrastructure and/or truck driver shortages.” Looking at Rastatt more specifically, Azuaga says: “I’m convinced that the rail industry will recover. Transport by train is important as it’s much less expensive than delivery via truck. Countries need to invest in an efficient rail network and maintain a thorough risk analysis. They need alternatives in place in case something goes wrong so that the supply chain can continue despite disruption.”
The key to dealing with supply chain interruptions is having visibility across the supply chain, but only 30 per cent of the survey respondents believe that have complete inventory and shipment visibility in real time and 23 per cent admitted to having very little or none at all. “Visibility is key to effectively managing a supply chain and it is alarming that for almost three quarters of respondents it is limited,” says Hunt. “Leading companies leverage real-time updates and dynamic ETAs to drive efficiencies, mitigate risks and provide the added value customers demand.”
“Organisations with limited visibility are vulnerable to selecting the wrong transport mode, increasing the use of expensive air freight, for example,” agrees Azuaga. “Different shipments of the same product may end up going to the same destination, and master data issues such as wrong pallet size could result in unnecessary added cost.”
Respondents agree that visibility is an issue but, in the marine sector in particular, limited data-sharing practices and a lack of communication are holding it back. “This trend could be reversed by embracing new digital technologies such as RFID scanners at ports and better collaboration between the carriers, terminal operators, vessel owners and other players,” Hunt says. It is interesting to note that both Rotterdam and Antwerp have recently begun implementing digitised systems to provide greater visibility with the aim of improving throughput speeds and reducing congestion –with the positive side-effect of providing more data and information to shippers. HCB
The survey covered more topics and also garnered some comments from the European Commission. It will be made available to delegates at this year’s LogiChem event, where the conference sessions will discuss these and other topics. HCB will be on hand to report back in a future issue but readers who want more information or are interested in attending, full details are available at https:// logichem.wbresearch.com/.
ACCORDING TO THE latest UK Logistics Confidence Index, published late last year by Barclays and Moore Stephens, more than 60 per cent of UK logistics companies say they have witnesses tougher trading conditions over the past 12 months and expect things to get worse after the UK leaves the EU at the end of March.
One of the key concerns expressed by more than 100 senior executives who took part in the survey was that of driver shortages; one in five logistics operators says they expect a decreased headcount in the next 12 months as EU-native drivers leave the UK and older drivers retire.
“The reality is that there is simply not enough new talent coming into the sector early enough to counter an ageing workforce and one of the main challenges in attracting recruits has been the perception that the industry lacks significant career opportunities,” says Mike Hemming, director of Catalytix at Masternaut.
One of the key ways of overcoming these challenges is to ensure that logistics companies work to create positions for drivers, which will allow them to remain safe, motivated, conscientious and most importantly happy. Masternaut, one of the longest standing vehicle tracking companies in the UK, offers a unique combination of technical expertise, simple user experience and consulting services that will help logistics operators not only manage a fleet of vehicles effectively but also ensure the wellbeing and development of their workforce.
“Happy drivers will be long-standing members of your team so it is important to ensure that you are doing everything you can to
ensure their personal wellbeing as well as job satisfaction,” Hemming says. “People are more likely to change their behaviour in a positive sense when they receive immediate rather than delayed feedback and Masternaut’s in-cab coaching device provides drivers with instant feedback on their driving performance when it detects wasteful and dangerous driving.
“Further to this, in a bid to reduce administration and improve efficiency for fleet drivers, our Smarter Driver app has been upgraded to allow drivers to carry out vehicle checks completely electronically.”
The daily walkaround check of a vehicle every time it is used has historically been a paper-heavy process for drivers and managers, involving filling in a form to assess condition and highlight damage. The new app allows drivers to run through a 20-point checklist on their smartphone, swiping right if an item is in good order or left if there is an issue to report.
“Recruiting is always a challenge as well as a time of uncertainty for any company but trailing new drivers with the support of Masternaut can be a lot less stressful than simply recruiting blindly,” Hemming continues. “Companies can place their new recruits on a three-month probation and carefully monitor their driving behaviour before making a decision to employ them permanently.
“Our non-intrusive CAN bus vehicle tracking device can read data straight from the vehicle’s computer so you can get the data you need, including fuel consumption and mileage, track speed, acceleration and braking as well as identify over-revving and idling.”
At the end of the day, logistics companies are the same as any other business in the respect that they always need to watch the bottom line and someone must always be held accountable when it comes to managing budget versus resource. “Masternaut offers a unique combination of industry-leading fleet management systems that allow companies to gain an unparalleled level of insight into their business, thus empowering them to make strategic decisions about when and where to recruit,” says Hemming. HCB www.masternaut.com
RESULTS • BERTSCHI IS ABLE TO REPORT ON A POSITIVE YEAR IN 2018 AND LOOK FORWARD TO CONTINUED INVESTMENT IN ITS PEOPLE, ASSETS AND CAPABILITIES IN 2019 AND BEYOND
Bertschi says it can “look back on a positive 2018”, having maintained its steady growth trajectory, with turnover up by another 8 per cent to a record figure of SFr 960m ($963m). Bertschi says the improvement was a result of the “favourable economic climate, paired with the company’s globalisation strategy”. The markets in Asia and South America provided the strongest momentum. Two other significant driving factors were the Chinese market and the doubling of storage and filling capacity at Bertschi’s chemicals terminal in Singapore for distribution in south-east Asia. In addition, Bertschi was able to integrate its subsidiary in São Paulo, Brazil – established
in 2017 – into its global network, which had a positive impact on growth of the group in 2018. Another major development in 2018 was the implementation of the company’s senior leadership succession plan, with Jan Arnet taking over from Hans-Jörg Bertschi in August. “Jan Arnet’s transition to CEO of the group was seamless, thus ensuring continuity of leadership for both our customers and our employees. It also safeguards our future as a strong, sustainable family company,” says Hans-Jörg Bertschi, who is staying on as executive chairman.
Current earnings will allow Bertschi to make substantial investments this year, concentrating on digitisation, its tank container fleet and its terminal and warehouse infrastructure. “Our plan is to continue to expand our presence in Asia and bolster our position in Europe,” says Bertschi.
That investment includes expansion of its new transhipment facility for the import, handling and storage of plastics, opened in Antwerp last year. The plan is to develop it in successive stages to become a major chemical logistics terminal. “This will enable liquid dangerous goods to be stored and distribution transport in Europe to be dispatched directly from the terminal via rail to European consumption centres,” says Arnet. “We are underlining Bertschi’s sustainable corporate strategy by shifting freight distribution from road transport to the more environmentally friendly, safer option of rail where possible.”
The launch of the TruckTracer app in 2018 was “a milestone for the company”. The app, which is also used by subcontractors, provides a central platform to allow drivers to update their status in real time. And digital transformation will continue to be a key theme in 2019. The focus is on business processes that can be made more efficient, secure and customer-friendly through the application of digital solutions. “Digitalisation of these processes will enable us to automate repetitive tasks,” explains Hans-Jörg Bertschi. “Of course, employees will remain at the centre of developments as we move further into the digital age. They will be able to spend more time on personal communication with customers and partners, and on solving complex logistical challenges – there are more than enough to go around.”
Bertschi’s globalisation and digitalisation strategy has led to a significant increase in the number of staff at its headquarters in Dürrenäsch, Switzerland, in the past few years. The workforce will be able to gradually move into an office extension over the next few weeks. In addition to modern office workstations, the new building has a canteen with a professional kitchen, cafeteria and terrace, and a specially designed recreational area in natural surroundings.
“With this appealing workplace, we are aiming to attract talented people away from the major centres and thus lay the foundation for the company’s development in the future,” explains Arnet. HCB www.bertschi.com
IMPERIAL LOGISTICS HAS opened a new dangerous goods warehouse near Osnabrück, in northern Germany. Development of the facility followed a study of regional demand for dangerous goods storage, triggered by the specific needs of one of its major customers and strong underlying demand growth. The 12,500-m² facility can accommodate 20,000 pallets of chemicals and is designed to handle all classes of dangerous goods except radioactives and explosives.
Imperial Logistics says it is now the leading specialist in the storage and warehousing of dangerous goods in Germany, with more than 30 years’ experience in working with some of the world’s major chemical companies. “Because of our specialisation in this sector, and our close relationship with the key players, we discovered that there was an unsatisfied need for hazardous goods warehousing in this region,” says Michael
Pohl, director of warehousing and distribution, business unit chemicals, for Imperial Logistics International.
“Outsourced logistics solutions for this sector must be competent and economical, but also comply with rigorous regulations,” Pohl adds. “Few logistics service providers can match Imperial Logistics’ ability to meet the rigorous regulatory requirements of building and operating a hazardous goods warehouse.”
Imperial Logistics says the 2.8-ha site will allow the varying warehousing needs of different clients to be accommodated in a multi-user facility, meaning that customers will only have to pay for the capacity they use. It will house solid, liquid and gaseous chemicals on racks or in blocks.
In addition to traditional warehousing, distribution, customs warehousing and
clearance for chemicals producers and traders, the new facility enables Imperial Logistics to offer added-value services such as temperaturecontrolled storage and transportation management, labelling, repacking and display construction. The company’s specialised chemical logistics IT solution will provide clients with valuable data and statistics enabling them to identify trends and optimise operations.
The warehouse embodies numerous safety features: the walls between storage sections are fireproof, as are all warehouse doors. All pallet racks are fitted with fire and smoke detectors, activating an integrated sprinkler system and automatically alerting the local fire brigade. Warning systems are triggered in the event of gas leaks or break-ins. In addition, any water used in fire-fighting is prevented from penetrating floors, and is safely collected in the building before professional disposal.
The new facility is ideally-located on the Niedersachsenpark, connected to Autobahn 1 – a major transport artery serving north-western Germany, Scandinavia, the Netherlands and the Rhine/Ruhr region.
Hakan Bicil, recently appointed as CEO of Imperial Logistics International, says: “Leveraging our specialist competencies, resources and skills, we have delivered productivity increases of over 20 per cent, cost efficiencies and improved risk management for our chemical clients. We will continue to customise our capabilities to drive our chemical clients’ competitiveness.
“Hazardous goods storage and distribution is an exciting growth market in Europe. New products like lithium ion batteries and increasing regulation make outsourcing an increasingly attractive option for clients. This is creating new business opportunities for Imperial Logistics,” concludes Bicil.
Imperial Logistics currently operates a total of around 20 specialist storage facilities throughout Germany, the Netherlands and Belgium with a total capacity of over 340,000 pallets. The company’s client-oriented solutions include on-site and off-site (singleuser or multi-user) warehouses, at which it picks up to 4,000 orders daily and undertakes 800,0000 shipments per annum. HCB www.imperiallogistics.com
Hoyer reports that it has now converted more than 10,000 of its tank containers to the Smart Tank concept. “With Smart Logistics, the company is today the innovation leader in the intelligently networked logistics field, and offers smart solutions to monitor, analyse and optimise logistics processes. One of the central points here is systematically upgrading the fleet to so-called Smart Tanks,” says the company.
Marlen Blechschmidt, head of digitalisation in the Netlog Business Unit, explains: “By using this technology, our Smart Tank will report deviations in critical load parameters, thus offering our customers even more safety, quality and efficiency for the product being transported.”
Hoyer’s Smart Tanks are equipped with sensors to monitor the parameters of products in transit, such as temperature, filling level, pressure, and the tank container’s location. These are important factors in ensuring the safety, security, efficiency and consistent quality of transport movements, Hoyer says. www.hoyer-group.com
Van den Bosch has delivered its first batch of tank containers to its new operation in Pakistan, which is operated out of the company’s Dubai-based subsidiary, Van den Bosch DMCC. The foodgrade tanks, which will be mainly used for the export of ethanol, are now at the Pakistan Terminal Operators depot in Karachi and, the company says, “represent a new milestone in the further development of the deep sea activities of Van den Bosch”.
“We have received a lot of positive feedback about the expansion to Pakistan,” says Bart van de Vorst, general manager of Van den Bosch DMCC. “The Asian continent offers great opportunities to develop our global network and will create new possibilities for our customers.” www.vandenbosch.com
Nexiot AG, one of the leading enablers of the digitisation process in the chemical logistics sector, has received a SFr 15m ($15.5m) injection of capital from SVC Ltd,
an investment vehicle of Credit Suisse. The investment will help Nexiot to continue to develop new technologies for the logistics industry, expand its team and boost its international commercial activities.
“The additional investment from a range of companies in Nexiot AG is a vote of confidence in our mission to develop unique solutions to drive global logistics digitisation,” says Marcel Scheurer, Nexiot’s CFO. “This development highlights our growing global success story and strengthens our leadership position in enabling the digital supply chain with true end-to-end solutions, in order to increase efficiency, as well as generate additional revenue streams and increase value for our clients and partners.”
Nexiot was formed in 2015 as a spin-off from the ETH Zürich technical university. Last year it opened new offices in Hamburg and Dallas. www.nexiot.ch
Milkyway Group has announced plans to build an unmanned chemical warehouse in Zhangjiagang, on the Yangtze River in Jiangsu province, China. The development is the outcome of a three-year project and will rely on management and control systems developed by the company.
Milkyway says the unmanned warehouse, due for completion this year, will make operations safer and faster, taking inventory out of the supply chain and improving efficiencies for the local chemical industry. Zhangjiagang is one of Milkyway’s 11 operating clusters in China.
The announcement was made at a ceremony in the city on 4 January, where Pan Guoqiang, deputy secretary and acting mayor of the Municipal Committee, said: “In recent years, Zhangjiagang has actively explored the path and mode of modern supply chain to promote high-quality development, and was officially approved as a national pilot city for supply chain innovation and application in October
last year. During the pilot period, Zhangjiagang will focus on building a number of characteristic industry supply chain platforms with strong integration ability and high collaborative efficiency, cultivating a number of intelligent logistics supply chain platforms with port logistics as the main body.”
Shi Xu, general manager of Milkyway’s warehousing group, said: “The total chemical throughput from the Millkyway Group is as high as 120m tonnes a year. Under such a huge cargo throughput, the key factor to ensure the safety and efficiency of the supply chain is to continuously invest in science in technology.” www.mwclg.com
Suttons Group is lending its support to an online campaign to help truck drivers stay healthy in body and mind. The campaign,
‘Truckers Who Run’, is a community-focused Facebook group started by Lee Gibson (below), a driving trainer based at Suttons’ Stockton-onTees depot, that now has more than 2,000 members. He felt he could not be the only UK trucker who would benefit from a dedicated place to discuss lifestyle, diet tips and fitness advice.
“It’s great to see this idea I had one day sitting in a truck has blossomed and is now helping drivers all over the country,” Gibson says. “We can advise our members on good places to run near where they’ve parked up for the night, offer them motivation when they’re finding it tough to exercise and provide a place to air worries and stresses, because mental health is just as important as physical fitness.”
“Suttons fully supports Lee with his campaign to assist drivers who are trying to improve and maintain their health and fitness,” adds Steve Hassall, operations director at
Suttons Tankers. “We encourage our drivers to join his online community and are backing this up with a series of well-being campaigns each month aimed at staff.” www.suttonsgroup.com
Stijn Bijnens has joined the board of directors of H Essers. Until recently he was general manager of investment company LRM and is currently CEO of Cegeka, an IT group.
“Stijn is truly the right man in the right place,” says Hilde Essers, chair of the H Essers board of directors. “In the coming years, there are many crucial innovation and digitisation projects in the pipeline that will allow us to further expand our strategic segments. With his extensive experience, he represents true added value for our board of directors.
“We will be rolling out many innovative projects in the coming years, both nationally and internationally, to optimise our services and further expand our strategic segments of chemicals, pharmaceuticals and high-value logistics,” Hilde Essers continues. “In Genk, we are developing our trimodal site Dry Port Genk, we are starting construction of our new head office, and much more. And we are constantly developing opportunities both nationally and internationally to further expand our synchromodal approach. By combining road, rail and water transport in an intelligent and dynamic way, we are able to simultaneously optimise the impact on the environment, the transit time and the cost price for customers. Synchromodality is a real game changer for our sector and for our company. Thanks to advanced systems, we can guarantee continuous monitoring and optimisation of the logistics process. Our present solutions already allow us to make the difference today for our customers, but our aim is to continue to play a pioneering role in this industry in the future.”
Bijnens is clearly ready for his new role, saying: “The company has always been a step ahead in terms of innovation and digitisation. It is fascinating to be able to contribute to this family business and help realise its growth ambitions. I look forward to an inspiring collaboration.”
LACK OF TRUST and an inherent antipathy to collaboration have led the chemical supply chain to become closed off to developments in technology and the advances that information sharing can bring to the table. In an attempt to break this logjam, TankContainerFinder.com (TCF) created its worldwide booking service for tank containers, matching tank container operators with cargo owners and vice versa.
In the chemical distribution industry, collaboration and trust play a significant role in everyday commercial operations, but key players are reluctant to work together.
“Collaboration is needed to create a more flexible and efficient ecosystem with more inner trust,” says Léon de Bruin, co-founder of TCF.
“We see a lot of empty returns, just because operators don’t want to share information about traffic lanes and are afraid that competitors will use this information to take over the business on these lanes. On the other hand, we also see operators working together and use each other’s networks and benefits like better shipping prices, albeit infrequently.”
There are many factors at play which all contribute to this widespread lack of trust in the chemical distribution industry. “A fixed, traditional mindset is, in our opinion, the biggest deterrent to collaboration,” adds de Bruin. “Players are often unwilling to
collaborate due to a lack of trust and a win-lose intention. Companies are not used to sharing information with competitors and creating win-win opportunities together.” This closed mindset – which may seem sensible from an objective point of view – is actually counterproductive and reduces the potential for future growth and collaborative innovation.
“As the discussion about scaling trust and the scaling problems that current power structures have is becoming ever more present, we see initiatives arise to tackle these problems,” de Bruin continues. “This starts with a willingness to open up for collaboration. Newer and younger generations are definitely more open and used to collaborate and will be the main drivers. When the intention for better collaboration is present, people and companies will automatically work on and find new ways to create trustless systems to rely on. As the logistics and supply chain industry is often still decades behind in technology, people with growth mindsets can make big steps forward if allowed within the company. We are living in times where change is inevitable and exponential. Our industry has to follow.”
Platforms such as TCF are making great strides in bringing the divided chemical supply chain into a more collaborative environment by providing a fully automated booking platform for tank container operators and users. TCF illustrates this with the case of Adrian Naidoo from TME Logistics, who had to ship 240 tank containers – 20 tanks every month for one year – from Durban to Rotterdam. Through TCF’s platform, which brings together tank container operators from all over the world, Naidoo was able to quickly and efficiently source the empty tanks in minutes, rather than the hours or days that TME would usually have to spend locating, making contact and negotiating with tank operators in order to achieve the same result. The fast, simple and intuitive nature of TCF’s platform lends itself to a collaborative environment. By offering a platform that can be utilised by anyone, companies are more likely to find themselves opening up to opportunities.
Those sorts of benefits are already available and, TCF believes, will be increasingly used by players throughout the supply chain over the next five to ten years. More cloud-based platforms are entering the market, opening up immense potential for collaboration – if the trust is there.
“TCF has created a big network in liquid bulk logistics and is in close contact with both sides of the marketplace, says de Bruin. “We would like to accelerate and contribute to innovation and collaboration within the ecosystem where we can, and also listen closely to our platform users to move in the ways they want us to. As an internet company and platform, we are leaning towards and focused on technological progress that optimises processes and enables collaboration. We are fortunate that we can move quickly and develop solutions that are needed in the market at any time.”
Feedback from industry is now generating changes in TCF’s service provision. This month, for instance, it is introducing a platform subscription fee and commission for suppliers. “TCF is entering a new phase with the introduction of our subscription plan,” says de Bruin. “We’ve grown our platform to more than 850 users and $25m in generated business in more than 100 countries since our start in 2017. Now it’s time to ask some commitment from tank container owners with the introduction of our subscription and transaction fee. “With the new fee structure, we can guarantee future customer-centric development and service, and further growth of the platform and network effects in 2019.”
“If TCF’s success thus far proves anything it is this: that industry is prepared to welcome new ways of doing old things, providing that they can be shown to be cost-effective and efficient,” says HCB’s editor, Peter Mackay. “There are plenty of inefficiencies in the current way of doing things that can be removed, with gains available for all those
active in the supply chain. And, as the millennial generation begins to take on managerial responsibilities, their openness and willingness to cooperate will become the norm.”
In the connected world we live in, companies are already more linked than they ever have been before, predominantly through social media. It is only to be expected that a generation which has only known collaboration and connection will lead the way in ushering the chemical supply chain into a new era of partnerships and tactical alliances.
“TCF and other similar platforms are at the forefront of that emerging trend, encouraging logistics players to become a connected community built on trust and the ability to learn from one another and to share the profits,” Mackay adds. “TCF is working hard to bridge the gap between what was and what will be, with more and more companies expected to follow suit as attitudes change.” HCB www.tankcontainerfinder.com
AS DIGITISATION PROCEEDS in the chemical supply chain, talk has inevitably turned to the potential to use blockchain techniques to offset persistent concerns about confidentiality and trust in the use of proprietary data. Yet there also seems to be widespread fear of this new technique, which has the potential to transform collaboration through the supply chain via the use of tamper-proof, verifiable distributed ledgers.
Perhaps what is needed is an example of how blockchain can work in practice, and that is something that Elemica and crossinx have been working on. The two parties have recently announced the successful completion of a pilot project involving leading international chemical manufacturers; wider application of the project will, the companies say, help to redefine B2B processes and support digital transformation.
In the project, Elemica, the leading digital supply network for process manufacturing industries, and crossinx, a network for financial business collaboration solutions, exist as nodes on a public blockchain, connecting structured data with unstructured data, such as documents, to enable multitier payment. In the pilot, two large chemical companies facilitated document and data transfer of invoices, purchase orders, delivery tenders and proof-of-delivery posts. With the ability to connect to a digital network, blockchain functionality can be made accessible to support a many-to-many connection of companies, facilitating payment processing.
“Similar to any new technology, there is a period of learning and evolution before adoption,” says Arun Samuga, CTO of Elemica.
“We like what we see so far and are identifying areas of clear applicability of the technology.”
Blockchain technology can be used to break supply chain data out of silos and reveal this information to all trading partners regardless of the network they are connected to. “Our goal is to use the blockchain to automate document exchange along the supply chain and make it more transparent. This is the basis for our supply chain finance solutions,” explains Marcus Laube, CEO and founder of crossinx.
The benefits of this capability with blockchain could lead to:
• employing a trustless, intermediaryfree, decentralised standard to exchange information between different stakeholders
• simplifying existing business processes and making them smarter
• auto-ordering based on IoT information
• automated PO confirmations
• auto-invoice creation based on pickup or proof of delivery
• auto-matching of invoices
• automated payments
• extending the concept to other complementary decentralised networks and from IoT devices
The success of the blockchain pilot project shows that the new technology can bring value to supply chains and businesses through the sharing of information, workflows and economies, the partners say.
Crossinx says it brings the accounting of private and public sectors to the next level with a business network unique to the German-speaking market. A team of 100 multinational employees help companies digitise their document-based finance and business processes. With over 150,000 connected companies, an invoice volume of €25bn and an expansion rate of 100 per cent, the company is a leading provider for financial business collaboration.
Elemica is the leading digital supply network for the process manufacturing industries. Elemica accelerates digital transformation by connecting, automating, anticipating and then transforming interbusiness supply chain processes for the products they buy, sell, and move. Launched in 2000, its customers now process over $500bn in commerce annually on the network. HCB www.elemica.com www.crossinx.com
THE RISE OF e-commerce systems has revolutionised customer behaviour and, indeed, is having a broader social impact. High street shopping is on the wane, and the exponential increase in home deliveries has pulled drivers out of the long-haul business, tempted by the more regular hours offered by local services.
In some industrial sectors – and the chemical industry is no exception –manufacturers and buyers have been slower to embrace e-commerce. Lately, though, increasing application of digitised systems is opening up supply chains to e-commerce solutions – and buyers are demanding the same levels of service in the B2B sphere as they already enjoy as B2C customers.
A number of major chemical manufacturers and some international chemical distributors are now offering e-commerce solutions in the ever-more competitive B2B market.
In theory at least, moving to digitised e-commerce sales channels can help level the playing field; in practice, however, the time and cost of building a sales platform from scratch is something that many small or medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) simply cannot do. Multinational corporations may have the resources to invest in the necessary IT developments but SMEs probably need a hand if they are to compete effectively.
“To win and retain customers in today’s super-competitive world, every organisation
needs to be agile, proactive and personal,” says Impratech. “With the chemical industry in mind, most firms in this traditionally conservative market do not have the support channels to cater for digital change.”
This is where Impratech steps in. The company was formed to offer a bespoke solution in the chemical distribution space, specifically for smaller chemical producers. Impratech provides producers and suppliers with a fully functioning portal customised with their logo and branding at a fraction of the cost of developing their own site. This also saves months of development time.
“This is a new way of selling to B2B customers and there are countless benefits to licensing our platform,” says Impratech. Each e-commerce platform is devised so as to be completely secure, flexible enough to be adapted to each user’s needs, and to be highly functional. It provides producers with visibility over every aspect of all transactions and, with an intuitive back office function, offers control and management of the online portal itself.
Once up and running, the system can handle requests from existing customers automatically, freeing up sales personnel to drive new business, Impratech says. Those existing customers will be able to see prices and transport rates in real time and track their orders from start to finish.
The system also allows Safety Data Sheets (SDSs) and other documentation to be kept up to date and made available to buyers.
For the producer, Impratech’s system monitors stock levels, generates automatic email notifications, and can be linked to existing SAP and Oracle ERP systems.
The Impratech platform has been developed by chemical distributors with more than 20 years’ experience in the market. That means it is based on a thorough understanding of the sales process and the needs of both buyer and seller.
The question now, as Impratech says, is not whether manufacturers can afford to launch their own e-commerce platform –it’s whether they can afford not to. HCB www.impratech.com
CONSIGNMENT • PROSHIP HAS PARTNERED WITH LABELMASTER TO PROVIDE ITS CUSTOMERS WITH AN END-TOEND SOLUTION, PARTICULARLY FOR CONSUMER GOODS THAT MEET HAZMAT CRITERIA
DIGITISATION IN THE dangerous goods supply chain is beginning to pick up steam. With more than 1.4m shipments of hazardous materials (hazmat) every day in the US alone, a more streamlined process has been needed for some time now. ProShip Inc, a Neopost company that already offers digitised systems for general goods, has announced a new partnership with Labelmaster, a leading provider of labels, packaging and technology for the safe and compliant transport of dangerous goods. The new partnership, using ProShip’s MultiCarrier Shipping Software, will allow dangerous
goods shippers to access up-to-date hazmat tables, carry out robust validation checks and generate compliant shipping papers.
“Hazmat compliance can be an intimidating and confusing undertaking,” says Matt Mullen, senior vice-president and managing director of ProShip. “In a recent survey, 65 per cent of respondents said that keeping up with changing regulations was one of their greatest challenges. ProShip’s partnership with Labelmaster alleviates that challenge and helps our customers meet delivery promises without delay. It is our responsibility to give our customers the framework that helps realise a positive return on investment from their hazmat shipping function, and Labelmaster helps us do that. We are thrilled to continuously add new features that keep our customers confident in their shipping strategies, no matter what they ship.”
Beyond explosives, corrosives and other flammable or radioactive materials, dangerous goods classification encompasses an array of everyday items including electronics, medical devices and even power tools. As regulations for shipping these items continue to expand and become more complex, companies that ship hazardous materials face greater risk for non-compliance, including stopped shipments,
supply chain delays and fines. ProShip’s software provides a fully integrated, automated and manifesting solution with the most certified carrier compliant services on the market, according to the company.
“Labelmaster’s Dangerous Goods Information System (DGIS) is updated as regulations change,” says Alan Schoen, president of Labelmaster. “The system validates the originator’s shipments against them, providing guidance on packaging, labelling and the filling out and printing of Shipper Declarations. This partnership will give ProShip customers the benefit of easier and more reliable hazmat shipping, all within one system.”
The shipping software encompasses a variety of management solutions, including warehouse and transport management. Warehouse management software provides support for day-to-day warehouse operations, enabling centralisation of tasks such as tracking inventory levels and stock locations. The transport management solution plans freight movements, freight rating and shipping across all modes, while also selecting optimal routes and carriers.
ProShip says its partnership with Labelmaster represents a significant step forward in the optimisation of shipping operations and carrier compliance. By bringing multi-carrier shipping software into the mix, companies are able to take the complexity out of this fast-growing market and create a smarter environment for its customers.
ProShip is a global provider of logistics software and product solutions, including enterprise-wide, multi-carrier shipping and manifesting software, automated packing solutions and intelligent parcel lockers. The company’s solutions enable goods to be delivered faster, more efficiently and more cost-effectively than ever possible. Labelmaster is a go-to source for companies that operate in the transport of dangerous goods. The company manufactures hazmat labels and UN certified packaging, as well as hazmat placards and regulatory publications, aimed at helping customers to remain complaint with all dangerous goods regulations and mitigate risk. HCB www.proshipinc.com
Boulting Ltd has launched a new cloudbased inspection software that will enable plant engineers to ensure control equipment in hazardous areas is compliant with the latest technical standard, EN 60079:17.
Boulting has worked in collaboration with an ATEX certifying body to design and implement the secure, paperless, cloudbased system for maintenance procedures in hazardous areas.
The user-friendly app provides clear visibility of hazardous area inspections and incorporates radio frequency identity (RFID) tags that make it easy to recall information for each device, including snags and equipment failures. The system integrates documents required to form an Explosive Protection Document (EPD) for an unlimited number of items, including all area classification documents, risk assessments, equipment certificates and details of all equipment requiring inspection, frequency of inspection and associated drawings. All this information is stored securely in the cloud, with client read-only access available.
By going paperless and installing the software on a tablet, engineers are able to navigate vital documents with ease. In addition, the software can help identify trends in any faults that may be common to a specific manufacturer or model. It is suitable for use in Zones 1, 2, 21 and 22.
When working in hazardous environments, which feature flammable gases, vapours or dust, the facility and all the equipment within it must meet EN 60079, which sets clear guidelines around zone classification, electrical installation and equipment protection in explosive atmospheres.
“As greater demand is placed on industries such as food and beverage, pharmaceuticals and energy, manufacturing is inevitably put under more strain, meaning processes can often become more complex,” says Josh Groarke, deputy managing director at Boulting
Ltd. “At Boulting we are continuously looking to develop new ways of supporting our clients that go beyond the traditional delivery of a project. The ATEX Hazardous Area Inspection software is one example of us using both our knowledge base and engineering skills to improve overall project delivery.
“Boulting provides a full suite of services, from design and installation right through to the inspection of electrical equipment and instrumentation. The health and safety of not only our staff but also that of the client is at the heart of everything we do, as proven by our 24th consecutive gold Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents (RoSPA) award, which we achieved in September last year.”
Boulting is a multi-disciplined engineering solutions provider, operating in a diverse range of industry sectors in the UK and internationally. Boulting provides a wide scope of project services from project management, design, fabrication and installation to commissioning and ongoing maintenance services and has strong inhouse resources in all the major engineering construction disciplines. HCB www.boulting.co.uk
730 Bridge St West, Unit 3 Waterloo, Ontario N2V 2J4, Canada
T (+1 519) 747 5075
www.acuteservices.com
Transport of Dangerous Goods
• March 26 – Waterloo
Confined Space Entry
• February 28 – Waterloo
• April 11 – Waterloo
Confined Space Rescue
• March 1 – Waterloo
• April 12 – Waterloo
HAZWOPER
• March 19-22 – Waterloo
HAZWOPER Refresher
• March 20 – Waterloo
GOODS TRAINING
8 Laurel Road
Hatton Vale, QLD 4341, Australia
T (+61 7) 5411 4415
www.amdg.com.au
Dangerous Goods – Initial Air Acceptance
• March 4-6 – Sydney
• March 18-20 – Brisbane
• April 8-10 – Sydney
• April 15-17 – Brisbane
Dangerous Goods – Air Transport Recertification
• February 21 – Brisbane
• March 7 – Sydney
• March 7 – Melbourne
• April 11 – Sydney
• April 11 – Melbourne
• April 18 – Brisbane
Dangerous Goods by Sea –Function-Specific, Initial
• March 11-12 – Sydney
• March 25-26 – Brisbane
• April 15-16 – Melbourne
BARRY TRAINING SERVICES
Sully Moors Road
Sully CF64 5RP, UK
T (+44 1446) 743 913
www.barrytrainingservices.co.uk
ADR – Initial
• March 18-22 – Barry
ADR – Refresher
• March 11-13 – Barry
BRITISH INTERNATIONAL FREIGHT ASSOCIATION (BIFA)
Redfern House, Browells Lane
Feltham, Middlesex TW13 7EP, UK
T (+44 20) 8844 3625
www.bifa.org
Dangerous Goods by Air
• February 25-27 – Feltham
• February 25-27 – Manchester
• March 4-6 – Bournemouth
• March 11-13 – Coventry
• March 18-20 – Bristol
• March 18-20 – Feltham
Dangerous Goods by Air –Revalidation
• February 28 – Altrincham
• February 28 – Feltham
• March 7 – Bournemouth
• March 14 – Coventry
• March 21 – Bristol
• March 21 – Feltham
Dangerous Goods by Road
• March 11-13 – Altrincham
• March 25-27 – Feltham
Dangerous Goods by Road –Revalidation
• March 12-13 – Altrincham
• March 25-26 – Feltham
Dangerous Goods by Sea
• March 14-15 – Altrincham
• March 28-29 – Feltham
• April 11-12 – Glasgow
Dangerous Goods Safety Advisor
• February 25-March 1 –Heathrow
• February 25-March 1 –Manchester
BUREAU OF DANGEROUS GOODS
4 Corporate Drive, Bldg. 4, Suite D
Cranbury, NJ 08512, USA
T (+1 609) 860 0300
www.bureaudg.com
IATA Initial Training
• March 13-14 – Minneapolis
• March 20-21 – Dayton, NJ
IATA Recurrent Training
• March 7 – Minneapolis
• March 13 – Dayton, NJ
• April 11 – Minneapolis
IATA & IMDG Initial Training
• March 13-15 – Minneapolis
• March 20-22 – Dayton, NJ
IATA & IMDG Recurrent Training
• March 13-14 – Dayton, NJ
CFR Initial Training
• March 11-12 – Minneapolis
• March 18-19 – Dayton, NJ
CFR 1-Day Recurrent Training
• March 6 – Minneapolis
• March 12 – Dayton, NJ
CFR and IMDG Initial
March 11-15 – Minneapolis
March 19-22 – Dayton, NJ
CFR and IMDG Recurrent
March 12/14 – Dayton, NJ
CFR and IATA Initial
• March 11-14 – Minneapolis
CFR and IATA Recurrent
March 6-7 – Minneapolis
March 12-13 – Dayton, NJ
Recurrent Training
March 14 – Dayton, NJ
April 12 – Minneapolis
CFR/IMDG/IATA Initial Training
March 11-15 – Minneapolis
March 18-22 – Dayton, NJ
CFR/IMDG/IATA Recurrent Training
March 12-14 – Dayton, NJ
CAMEON
PO Box 17345
EH12 1DJ, UK
(+44 131) 334 1929
Goods by Air
April 8-10 – Manchester
Goods by Air –Revalidation
• May 17 – Manchester Dangerous Goods by Road and Sea
May 14-16 – Manchester
Goods by Road –Upgrade
April 11 – Manchester
Goods by Sea –
• April 12 – Manchester
Goods Safety Adviser
• February 25-March 1 –Manchester
INTERNATIONAL
PO Box 176
Shepperton TW17 8WP, UK
T (+44 1932) 769682
P O Box 580026
Houston, TX 77258-0026, USA
T (+1 281) 333 4672
www.cargotraining.com
Dangerous Goods by Air – ICAO (full course)
• February 25-27 – Heathrow
• February 25-27 – Manchester
• March 4-6 – Bournemouth
• March 11-13 – Birmingham, UK
• March 11-13 – Dallas
• March 11-13 – Houston
• March 18-20 – Bristol
• March 18-20 – Heathrow
• March 18-20 – Orlando
• April 1-3 – Houston
• April 8-10 – Heathrow
• April 8-10 – Newcastle
Dangerous Goods by Air –Revalidation
• February 28-March 1 –Heathrow
• February 28-March 1 –Manchester
• March 7-8 – Bournemouth
• March 12-13 – Dallas
• March 14-15 – Birmingham, UK
• March 19-20 – Orlando
• March 21-22 – Bristol
• March 21-22 – Heathrow
• April 2-3 – Houston
• April 9-10 – Newcastle
• April 11-12 – Heathrow
Dangerous Goods by Road – ADR (full course)
• March 11-13 – Manchester
• March 25-27 – Heathrow
Dangerous Goods by Road –Revalidation
• March 12-13 – Manchester
• March 26-27 – Heathrow
Dangerous Goods by Sea (IMDG)
• March 14-15 – Dallas
• March 14-15 – Manchester
• March 21-22 – Orlando
• March 27-28 – Heathrow
• April 4-5 – Houston
• April 11-12 – Glasgow
IMDG – Sea – Revalidation
• March 15 – Dallas
• March 22 – Orlando
• April 5 – Houston
Dangerous Goods Multimodal
• March 18-22 – Dallas
Dangerous Goods Safety Adviser
• February 25-March 1 –Heathrow
• February 25-March 1 –Manchester
Dangerous Goods Safety Adviser (Refresher)
• February 27-March 1 –Heathrow
• February 27-March 1 –Manchester Radioactive Materials by Air (full course)
• April 15-16 – Heathrow
Radioactive Materials by Air –Revalidation
• April 16 – Heathrow
Suite 907, Silvercord Tower 2
30 Canton Road, Tsim Sha Tsui Kowloon, Hong Kong
T (+852) 2961 4887
www.chemfreight.com.hk
IATA Basic DG Regulations
• March 4-8 – Kowloon
• March 18-22 – Kowloon
• April 8-12 – Kowloon
IATA Refresher DG Regulations
• February 25-27 – Kowloon
• March 12-14 – Kowloon
• March 25-27 – Kowloon
• April 1-3 – Kowloon
IATA Dangerous Goods Awareness
• February 28 – Kowloon
• March 11 – Kowloon
• March 28 – Kowloon
• April 4 – Kowloon
ADVISORY COUNCIL
7501 Greenway Center Drive, Suite 760
Greenbelt, MD 20770, USA T (+1 202) 289 4550 www.dgac.org
Multi-Modal Transportation –Initial
• March 18-22 – Houston
Multi-Modal Transportation –Recurrent
• March 14-15 – Houston
Classifying Hazardous Materials for Transportation
• April 15-17 – Orlando
Dangerous Goods Safety Adviser
• March 4-8 – Houston
PO Box 7325
York, PA 17404, USA
T (+1 717) 848 8840
www.hazshipper.com
49 CFR & International AirCertification
• March 12-14 – Atlanta
• April 1-3 – Newark
• April 15-17 – Madison
49 CFR – Certification
• March 12-13 – Atlanta
• April 1-2 – Newark
• April 15-16 – Madison
International Air – Recertification
• March 14 – Atlanta
• April 3 – Newark
• April 17 – Madison
FREIGHT TRANSPORT ASSOCIATION
Hermes House, St John’s Road
Tunbridge Wells TN4 9UZ, UK
T (+44 1892) 526171
www.fta.co.uk
Dangerous Goods Safety Adviser
• February 25-March 1 – Stirling
ADR – Initial
• March 25-29 – Stirling
• April 1-5 – Tunbridge Wells
• April 8-12 – Leamington Spa ADR – Refresher
• March 19-21 – West Thurrock
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS COMPLIANCE
11380 NW 34th Street
Doral, FL 33178, USA
T (+1 305) 471 0561 www.hazmatcom.com
Multimodal General Awareness
• March 26 – Miami
• April 16 – Miami
IATA Air Initial
• April 9-11 – Miami IATA Air Recurrent
• March 19 – Miami
IMDG Ocean Initial
• March 12-13 – Miami
IMDG Ocean Recurrent
• March 20 – Miami
Lithium Batteries (IATA/IMDG)
• March 21 – Miami
• April 18 – Miami
49 CFR Highways
• March 14 – Miami
• April 17 – Miami
HAZMATEAM
12 Kimball Hill Road Hudson, NH 03051-3915, USA
T (+1 603) 882 1112
www.hazmateam.com
49 CFR Ground Transportation
– Initial
• March 19-21 – Hudson
49 CFR Ground Transportation –
Intermediate Refresher
• April 3-4 – Hudson
49 CFR Ground Transportation –
Advanced Refresher
• February 27 – Hudson
• April 30 – Hudson
DOT Manifesting and Function Specific (49 CFR) Ground Transportation
• March 27 – Hudson
International Air Shipping – Initial
• April 24-26 – Hudson
International Air Shipping –Refresher
• April 10-11 – Hudson
Transportation of Lithium Metal and Lithium Ion Batteries
• April 8 – Hudson
Water Transportation of Dangerous Goods (IMDG) – Initial
• March 5-6 – Hudson
OSHA Emergency Response Technician – Initial
• March 11-13 – Hudson
OSHA Emergency Response Refresher
• February 26 – Hudson
• March 25 – Hudson OSHA/EPA Emergency Response – Initial
• March 11-15 – Hudson Confined Space Entrant/ Attendant
• April 18 – Hudson Confined Space Rescue
• April 19 – Hudson
HAZMAT TRAINING
SCHOOL SINGAPORE
146A Changi Road Singapore 419726
T (+65) 6542 5539
www.haz-mat-training.com
IATA Dangerous Goods Regulations (Initial)
• March 11-15 – Singapore
IATA Dangerous Goods Regulations (Recurrent)
• February 27-28 – Singapore
• March 14-15 – Singapore
• April 3-4 – Singapore IATA Dangerous Goods Regulations (Awareness)
• March 11 – Singapore
IMDG Code Dangerous Goods By Sea
• February 25-26 – Singapore
• April 1-2 – Singapore
Chemical Safety Awareness
• March 5 – Singapore
• April 9 – Singapore
SCDF Hazmat Transport Driver
Permit
• March 4 – Singapore
• April 8 – Singapore
2150 Liberty Drive
Niagara Falls, NY 14304, USA
T (+1 888) 442 9628
88 Lindsay Avenue
Dorval, QC H9P 2T8, Canada
T (+1 888) 977 4834
www.thecompliancecenter.com
Shipping Hazardous Materials by Ground in USA: Refresher
• March 13 – St Louis
• April 3 – Niagara Falls, NY
Shipping Dangerous Goods by Ground in Canada: Initial
• March 26-27 – Montreal
• April 24-25 – Toronto
Shipping Dangerous Goods by Ground in Canada: Refresher
• March 12 – Toronto
• April 24 – Montreal
Shipping Dangerous Goods by Ground in Canada: 1-Day Initial/ Refresher
• March 20 – Vancouver
• April 24 – Vancouver
Shipping Dangerous Goods by Air: Initial
• March 21 – Vancouver
• April 25 – Vancouver
Shipping Dangerous Goods by Air: Refresher
• March 13 – Toronto
• March 14 – St Louis
• April 4 – Niagara Falls, NY
Shipping Dangerous Goods by Sea: Initial
• March 5-6 – Montreal
Shipping Dangerous Goods by Sea: Refresher
• March 14 – Toronto
• April 11 – Montreal
INTERNATIONAL AIR
TRANSPORT ASSOCIATION
800 Place Victoria, PO Box 113 Montreal H4Z 1M1 Quebec, Canada.
T (+1 514) 874 0202
www.iata.org/training
Dangerous Goods Regulations (DGR) – Initial, Category 6
• February 25-March 1 –Amsterdam
• March 4-8 – Singapore
• April 8-12 – Lagos
• April 15-19 – Brussels
Dangerous Goods Regulations (DGR) – Recurrent, Category 6
• February 27-March 1 – Milano
• March 27-29 – Amsterdam
• April 15-17 – Singapore
Dangerous Goods Regulations (DGR) – Instructor Refresher
• February 27-March 1 – London
• April 3-5 – Singapore
• April 15-17 – Switzerland
Professional Skills for DGR Instructors – Categories 1,2,3,6
• March 4-8 – London
• March 18-22 – Singapore Shipping Lithium Batteries by Air
• March 4-5 – Singapore
• March 18-19 – Miami Transport of Dangerous Goods by Sea (IMDG)
• March 20-22 – Miami
OILSPILL RESPONSE TRAINING
Lower William Street
Southampton SO14 5QE, UK T (+44 23) 8033 1551 www.oilspillresponsetraining.com
Oil Spill Clearance – On-Scene Commander (IMO Level 2)
• March 4-8 – Southampton
• March 11-15 – Singapore
On-Scene Commander – AsiaPacific (IMO Level 2)
• March 26-28 – Brunei
On-Scene Commander –Americas (IMO Level 2)
• April 8-12 – Fort Lauderdale Oil Spill Response Management (IMO Level 3)
• March 18-21 – Southampton
• April 10-12 – Kuala Lumpur Oil Spill Response Refresher (IMO 1 to 3)
• April 16 – Southampton
PETER EAST ASSOCIATES
504 Centennial Park Centennial Avenue
Elstree, Herts WD6 3FG, UK T (+44 20) 8953 6721
www.petereast.com
Carriage of Dangerous Goods by Air – Certification
• March 4-6 – Heathrow
• March 11-13 – Manchester
• March 18-20 – Stansted
• March 18-20 – Northampton
• April 8-10 – Heathrow
• April 8-10 – East Midlands Carriage of Dangerous Goods by Air – Revalidation
• March 7 – Heathrow
• March 14-15 – Manchester
• March 21-22 – Stansted
• March 21-22 – Northampton
• April 11-12 – Heathrow
• April 11-12 – East Midlands Carriage of Dangerous Goods by Road & Sea
• March 4-6 – Dublin
• March 11-13 – East Midlands
• March 25-27 – Southampton
• April 1-3 – Stansted Carriage of Lithium Batteries by Air, Road & Sea
• March 14-15 – Elstree
Carriage of Excepted & Limited Quantities by Air, Road and Sea
• April 15-17 – Elstree
Dangerous Goods Safety Adviser
• February 25-March 1 – Heathrow
• February 25-March 1 –Manchester
Sigma House, A13 Eastbound
Orsett, Grays RM16 3AY, UK
T (+44 1375) 671111
www.sigmastudies.co.uk
ADR Initial (Core, Tanks, Packages & 7 Classes)
• March 4-8 – Grays
• March 11-15 – Grays
• April 1-5 – Grays
ADR Initial/Refresher (Core, Tanks & Class 3)
• March 11-13 – Grays
• April 8-10 – Grays
ADR Refresher (Core, Tanks, Packagaes & 7 Classes)
• March 18-20 – Grays
• April 15-17 – Grays
ESAD & SQAS Revisions 2019
FEBRUARY 19, CREWE
CBA-hosted workshop on changes to the SQAS questionnaires www.chemical.org.uk/training-and-workshops/ esad-sqas-revisions-2019-new-workshop/
International Petroleum Week (IP Week)
FEBRUARY 26-28, LONDON
Annual week of meetings, lunches, conferences and seminars in London www.ipweek.co.uk/_nocache
Hazardex 2019
FEBRUARY 27-28, RUNCORN Conference and exhibition on hazardous area operations www.hazardexonthenet.net/event. aspx?EventID=4783
MARCH 3-5, SCOTTSDALE
Bi-annual meeting and tradeshow of the Petroleum Packaging Council www.ppcouncil.org/upcoming-meetings.php
MARCH 5-6, LONDON
Tenth annual conference, co-hosted by the International Parcel Tankers Association http://cpt-conference.com/
MARCH 12-14, SINGAPORE
13th global conference on air cargo www.iata.org/events/wcs/pages/index.aspx
MARCH 13, CREWE
Regular one-day CBA workshop for dutyholders www.chemical.org.uk/training-and-workshops/ cdg-practitioners-dgsa-update/
BADGP
MARCH 14, COVENTRY
Annual AGM and seminar of the British Association of Dangerous Goods Professionals www.badgp.org/event-3120064
MARCH 16-20, LAS VEGAS
Biannual meeting of the Society of Chemical Hazard Communication www.schc.org/meetings
MARCH 17-19, SAN ANTONIO
American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers’ annual meeting for refiners and marketers www.afpm.org/Conferences/
Dangerous Goods ANZ 2019
MARCH 18-19, MELBOURNE
Workshop on hazardous chemicals and dangerous goods compliance www.marcusevans-conferences-australian.com/ marcusevans-conferences-event-details
Tanks and Terminals 2019
MARCH 18-19, DUBAI
Conference and workshop on integrity management of aboveground storage tanks www.marcusevans-conferences-middleeastern. com/marcusevans-conferences-event-details. asp?EventID=24765&SectorID=7
Intermodal South America
MARCH 19-21, SÃO PAULO International exhibition on intermodal logistics, cargo transport and international trade www.intermodal.com.br/en
MARCH 19-21, AMSTERDAM Chemical supply chain and logistics conference http://logichem.wbresearch.com/
AFPM IPC
MARCH 24-26, SAN ANTONIO
AFPM’s annual International Petrochemical Conference www.afpm.org/Conferences/
International Transport & Logistics Week (SITL)
MARCH 26-28, PARIS Annual transport event, including inaugural Dangerous Goods Logistics Pavilion www.sitl.eu/en/Home/
StocExpo 2019
MARCH 26-28, ROTTERDAM
The main annual exhibition and
conference for the European tank terminal industry www.easyfairs.com/stocexpo-europe-2019/ stocexpo-europe-2019/
NACD Responsible Distribution Workshop
MARCH 27-28, ATLANTA
Meeting for code coordinators and others subject to Responsible Distribution www.nacd.com/meetings/workshops/
Industrial Pack 2019
MARCH 27-28, ATLANTA Exhibition and networking event for the North American industrial packaging sector www.easyfairs.com/industrial-pack-2019/industrialpack-2019/
NISTM
APRIL 2-4, ORLANDO
National Institute for Storage Tank Management’s 21st annual international aboveground storage tank conference and trade show www.nistm.org
COSTHA 2019
APRIL 7-11, LONG BEACH Annual forum and expo of the Council on Safe Transportation of Hazardous Articles www.costha.com
Gefahrgut & Gefahrstoff
APRIL 9-11, LEIPZIG Trade fair for all those involved in the transport and internal logistics of dangerous goods and materials www.ggs-tradefair.com/?language=en
LogiPharma
APRIL 9-11, MONTREUX Conference on the end-to-end pharmaceutical supply chain www.logipharmaeu.wbresearch.com
GPCA Supply Chain Conference
APRIL 15-17, DUBAI
11th annual meeting of logistics professionals in the Gulf Petrochemicals and Chemicals Association www.gpcasupplychain.com
Date Location Vehicle Type Substance Details Source
5/11/18 Denver, road tanker calcium Tank truck rolled over on Peoria and 39th, spilling some calcium nitrate cargo and diesel fuel; remaining Denver Colorado, US nitrate load had to be transferred before truck could be righted; severe traffic disruption; no injuries reported Post
6/11/18 Cleveland, road tanker jet fuel Tank truck collided with another vehicle near hangar at Cleveland Hopkins International Airport, causing Fox Ohio, US spill of some 5,000 gal (19 m³) jet fuel; no injuries or interruption to flight schedules News
7/11/18 Santa Fe Springs, freight train TDI Seven cars derailed, including one tank car with 500 gal (1,900 litres) toluene diisocyanate; no leaks Whittier California, US reported but nearby schools advised to shelter in place; UP and BNSF tracks closed for response D’y News
11/11/18 Toronto, freight train VAM Five cars of CN train, three with vinyl acetate, derailed in Scarborough; no leak of chemical, though other CBC Ontario, Canada cars spilled rice, grain; 300-metre safety perimeter set up; no injuries reported
11/11/18 Bokajan, road tankers fuel Two fuel tankers, one gas tanker burned when fire broke out in parking area; nearby shop was also destroyed; The Assam, India police found evidence of fuel theft and suspect spark from pump ignited vapours Sentinel
12/11/18 Ripon, freight train fertiliser Five cars of Wisconsin & Southern train derailed when track buckled; cars stayed upright but fertiliser Oshkosh Wisconsin, US had to be unloaded to dump trucks; responders concerned about risk of fire or cars falling over NWestern
13/11/18 Techiman, road tanker fuel Road tanker caught fire as it was about to make delivery; tanker exploded, spreading fire to filling station, 3news Brong Ahafo, Ghana another truck; town’s fire tender out of action so no firefighting action possible for 40 minutes
14/11/18 Silverton, road tanker MMA Miller Transporters tank truck lost control, ran up embankment and overturned on US 550; tank did not The Colorado, US rupture but some methyl methacrylate cargo leaked from valve; rest of cargo transferred to second tanker Journal
15/11/18 Gwanda, bus gas 42 people killed in explosion, fire on bus travelling from border to Bulawayo; survivors reported smelling Big News Matab S, Zimbabwe gas before the blast; suspected that one passenger had brought cooking gas on board, valve may have leaked Network 16/11/18 nr Port Dickson, truck nitric acid Truck driver lost control, skidded on bend; six drums of nitric acid fell from truck, spilling acid to road; Bernama NSN, Malaysia responders prevented spill reaching drains; no injuries reported 16/11/18 Sindh province, road tankers oil Speeding oil tanker crashed into rear of another tanker on Super Highway between Hyderabad and Karachi; The Int’l Pakistan both tankers caught fire; blaze spread to three other vehicles; one driver died, others injured News
16/11/18 Akron, road tanker gasoline Tank truck with 8,500 gal (32 m³) gasoline caught fire on OH 8; no indication of cause of fire; fire crews Beacon Ohio, US managed to extinguish fire before it spread to gasoline cargo; road closed until cargo was transferred Journal 16/11/18 Chrokee county, road tanker toluene Tank truck with 9,000 gal (34 m³) toluene overturned on I-85; no leak reported but highway was closed in WSPA S Carolina, US both directions to allow responders to transfer product; driver cited for speeding
17/11/18 Douala, road tanker oil At least seven people were killed when brakes failed on oil tanker, said to be speeding, and it ran into Xinhua Cameroon crowd of motorcyclists along road; fortunately tanker did not explode, or there would have been more deaths
17/11/18 Byromville, freight train LPG 30 cars of CSX train derailed, some falling from overpass onto Highway 90; four cars involved had LPG; AP Georgia, US no leaks reported but one-mile evacuation ordered, later reduced; air quality being monitored
18/11/18 Hulu Selangor, road tanker gasoline
Driver lost control of road tanker heading from Putrajaya to Perak with unspecified oil cargo; vehicle crashed, The Selangor, Malaysia overturned on North-South Expressway; some oil spilled to road; driver unhurt Star (KL)
18/11/18 Uch Sharif, road tanker diesel Road tanker heading from Karachi to Sheikhupura with 40,000 litres diesel overturned on National Highway, The Punjab, Pakistan reportedly due to speeding; around half its load spilled to road; driver, helper both injured in crash Nation
21/11/18 Spring Lake Park, truck carbon Driver of carbon dioxide delivery truck was found dead in the back of the truck, parked outside McDonald’s; CDL Life Minnesota, US dioxide thought that he might have been trying to fix hose that had broken and was overcome by leaking CO2
22/11/18 Howrah, road tanker LPG Head-on collision between LPG tanker, truck on Kona Expressway caused fire that destroyed both vehicles, Zee E Bengal, India killed both drivers; one policeman injured; fire damaged power cables on Howrah-Amta rail line News
22/11/18 Chon Thanh, road tanker gasoline Road tanker crashed into back of motorbike rickshaw on NH 13; tanker then ran into median, hit electricity VN Binh Phuoc, Vietnam pole, overturned; spilling gasoline ignited; fire spread to nearby houses; six killed in blaze, others injured Express
30/11/18 nr Gainesville, truck ammonium Double trailer overturned on US 160, spilling part of its load of ammonium nitrate in powder form across ky3.com Missouri, US nitrate road; road closed for several hours while authorities cleaned up the spill; no injuries reported
30/11/18 Lafayette, truck phosphoric Truck with load of phosacid was in collision with another vehicle; crash resulted in leak of acid, closing KATC Louisiana, US acid road for several hours; remaining acid was unloaded; no injuries reported
1/12/18 nr Omsk, freight train fuel oil More than 20 cars of 70-car train derailed near Omsk/Tyumen border; train carried military equipment, fuel The Koz Russia oil in tanks; some fuel oil spilled but did not spread; no injuries reported
4/11/18 Quanzhou, C9
Hose broke during loading of unidentified vessel with C9 at Fujian Donggang Petrochemical terminal; some SCMP Fujian, China 7 tonnes C9 spilled to sea; 52 people sickened by fumes; major fish kill; seven people arrested
5/11/18 Leixões, HSL Porto formic acid
Leak of formic acid from container aboard containership in port; not clear if box was on ship or dock; FleetMon Portugal responders cleared spill; authorities said there was no risk to public
6/11/18 Panama City, Charlotte
Three containers fell from berthed containership; two boxes fell onto bunker tanker Kollum moored FleetMon Panama Maersk alongside; tanker was damaged but fortunately there was no fire
8/11/18 off Bergen, Sola TS crude oil Tanker (112,700 dwt, 2017), outbound from Sture terminal with cargo of crude, collided with Norwegian FleetMon Norway Navy frigate KNM Helge Ingstad; tanker not badly damaged; frigate, at fault, later sank
9/11/18 Heraklion, GasLog LNG LNG carrier (2014) with 150,000 m³ cargo ran aground outside breakwater on approach to port; tugs freed Maritime Crete, Greece Saratoga carrier, which anchored off for inspection; vessel was en route from Texas to Aliaga, Turkey Bulletin
16/11/18 off Newfoundland, SeaRose crude oil Some 250 m³ crude oil leak from damaged flowline to FPSO 350 km offshore; bad weather hampered CBC Canada response; Husky Energy was in the process of restarting operations after near-miss with iceberg in 2017
18/11/18 Ennore, Coral Stars furnace oil Hose ruptured during discharge from product tanker (40,000 dwt, 2004) at Kamarajar Port; “less than 2 tonnes” IB Times Chennai, India spilt to harbour waters; booms deployed around tanker, skimmers and absorbents also deployed
20/11/18 east of Qatar, Durban
Asphalt tanker (1,370 dwt, 1983) developed list, later sank; not known if tanker was in cargo at the time but FleetMon Arabian Gulf Queen no pollution reported; all 12 crew rescued by French Navy helicopter, some suffering injuries
Date Location Plant type Substance Details Source
10/11/18 San Angelo, pipeline natural gas DCP Midstream gas line ruptured, caught fire; two people digging for new line alongside were injured; Reuters Texas, US fire was allowed to burn until pressure in line was exhausted
12/11/18 Arnesano, fireworks fireworks One person killed, two workers injured by explosion in shed at “pyrotechnic games” factory; deceased was Tuscia Lecce, Italy factory son of the owner; fire crews managed to prevent fire spreading; investigation ordered Web
12/11/18 Cugir, arms factory weapons
One worker killed by explosion in tunnel where weapons are tested at state-owned plant that makes pistols, AP Romania other weapons; investigation under way
12/11/18 Guadix, fireworks fireworks Three people killed by massive explosion at Pirotecnia María Angustias plant; blast was felt all over city; Euro Andalucia, Spain factory similar incident at same facility in 2004 Weekly
13/11/18 Murfreesboro, oil depot waste oil Man arrested after admitting spilling 20,000 gal (75 m³) used motor oil, antifreeze, wastewater at Volunteer WVLT Tennessee, US Oil Services; half was collected in berm, nearby waterways boomed to prevent spill spreading
16/11/18 Doi Saket, fireworks gunpowder Two workers killed by explosion at unlicensed fireworks factory during mixing of potassium chlorate and The Chiang Mai, Thailand factory gunpowder; roof collapsed, building engulfed in flames; factory said to be making funeral fireworks Nation
16/11/18 nr Dulac, oilwell crude oil Some 40 bbl crude spilled from flow line at Texas Petroleum’s Lake Paige oilfield to marshland; USCG RSOE Louisiana, US authorised controlled burn; cause of leak under investigation
17/11/18 Grand View, hazwaste waste One worker killed while moving materials at US Ecology site; three other workers injured; blast said to have AP Idaho, US facility taken place during routine operations; investigation underway
20/11/18 Kumasi, filling LPG Security guard at filling station was killed by apparent gas explosion, three more seriously hurt; resulting fire Ghana Ashanti, Ghana station spread to nearby buildings, destroying several cars; cause under investigation Web
20/11/18 Wardha, army depot explosives At least six killed, 18 injured by massive explosion at Central Ammunition Depot during disposal of unused World Maharashtra, India explosives; similar incident in May 2016 when 13 were killed News24x7
25/11/18 Port-of-Spain, tank terminal fuel Fire broke out in storage tank at Sea Lots tank farm; operator National Petroleum said blaze would not Loop Trinidad impact fuel supplies; rapid response by fire crews prevented fire from spreading
25/11/18 New Castle, chemical ethylene Delaware Memorial Bridge had to be closed after leak of EO from Croda Atlas Point plant on Delaware side; NBC Delaware, US plant oxide leak came from incorrect gasket fitted on line at new bio-ethanol unit; locals concerned by operations
27/11/18 Loreto, pipeline crude oil Some 8,000 bbl crude oil spilled from PetroPeru line in remote jungle region; operator blamed sabotage by Earther Peru indigenous community; government commission sent to area to investigate
28/11/18 Zhangjiakou, chemical vinyl Leak of vinyl chloride from tank at Hebei Shenghua Chemical plant spread to road outside; vapours ignited, Xinhua Hebei, China plant chloride engulfing several vehicles; 23 killed; police arrested 15 employees from chemical plant
‘Runaway’ is a dangerous phenomenon where the running diesel engine draws extra energy from low concentrations of any hydrocarbons in the surrounding air. This causes uncontrolled overspeed beyond the safe design limits and an explosion or ignition of the external air/fuel mixture.
stop a diesel engine. There is very little margin for error if engine shutdown is dependent on human intervention. The only proven, reliable method to stop the engine running away beyond a safe limit is to install an emergency shutoff valve in the engine’s air intake system. Blocking the engine’s air intake effectively cuts off the external fuel source and air supply, so the engine quickly stops and the ignition source is removed.
Few industries are more hazardous or more safety-conscious than oil and gas and understanding the lessons learnt from the Texas City refinery and Buncefield fuel depot explosions is useful for addressing this safety issue. The key recommendation is to ensure that these risks are understood by all employees and that this message is reinforced. As regulations change and new standards and guidance are developed, consideration should be given to periodic updates to maintain operator awareness.
PETROLEUM PRODUCTS PLAY a vital role in our day-to-day life and confidence in the safety of the industry’s operations is paramount. Diesel engine runaway is an unexpected danger for bulk liquids storage operations at Control of Major Accident Hazards (COMAH) sites, and has led to fatal accidents for companies involved in storing crude oil, petroleum and refined products.
Drawing in the surrounding combustible mixture and using this energy as fuel is both unstable and uncontrollable. The engine’s control system attempts to limit the diesel injection to keep the engine under control but, as more vapours are ingested, the speed will increase beyond the normal limits This can cause the internal valves to bounce, exposing the combustion to the manifolds and the flames will pass out, meeting the flammable vapours being drawn in.
Recent tests by the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) have shown that a diesel engine can start to run away within three to nine seconds of a gas being drawn in, at a concentration as low as 22 per cent Lower Explosive Limit (LEL). Once this begins, turning off the ignition key will not
Areas designated for no ignition sources are places where diesel engines must have appropriate upgrades to mitigate their potential for ignition. All employees should be educated about the risks and a risk assessment should be performed. An inspection and maintenance schedule should be implemented to ensure the overspeed systems are functional and fit for purpose. An air shut-off valve is not a ‘fit and forget’ device and a visual inspection may not be sufficient to ensure valve function. The selected air shut-off valves must be engineered to withstand the harsh site conditions, extreme temperatures and high vibrations of the engine.
For more than 25 years, AMOT has been promoting safety by raising awareness of the explosive risks from runaway diesel engines and educating industry professionals of ways to better protect equipment and employees. AMOT offers on-site training, consultations and public presentations to operators and managers and safety specialists to educate on best practices adopted within the global oil and gas industry. HCB www.chalwyn.com
AMENDMENT 39-18 OF the International Maritime Dangerous Goods (IMDG) Code takes mandatory effect from 1 January 2020 but can be applied on a voluntary basis this year. This latest edition includes further changes to the provisions applicable to the carriage of polymerising substances, following the introduction of a new subdivision in Class 4.1 in Amendment 38-16.
These changes were largely prompted by the explosion and fire aboard the containership MSC Flaminia in the Atlantic Ocean in July 2012. Investigation identified that the origin of the fire was in two tank containers containing divinyl benzene (DVB). The cargo had polymerised spontaneously, generating a large amount of heat that affected other containers. Three crew died in the incident and the financial losses are expected to be at least $280m.
To help improve safety during the carriage of DVB in tank containers, new guidelines have been published by the Cargo Incident Notification System (CINS), the International Group of P&I Clubs (IG) and the TT Club.
The guidelines note two changes that have been introduced into shipping practices for DVB. Firstly, while DVB has been shipped for many years with very few incidents, since 2006 it has tended to be shipped in a higher concentration – 80 per cent (as was the case in the MSC Flaminia incident) rather than 60 per cent. Moreover, it is also being regularly carried in tank containers without temperature control, rather than in drums packed in refrigerated containers.
Since these new practices were introduced, the guidelines say, there has been an increase in the frequency of polymerisation incidents; so
far, these have mostly taken place before the cargo has been loaded aboard ship, and most often when the DVB is being shipped from the warmer regions of the US in the summer.
DVB is shipped under UN 3532 if stabilised or UN 3534 if shipped under temperature control. When shipped without temperature control, special provision 386 of the IMDG Code now requires that a risk assessment is carried out to determine if the level of stabilisation is sufficient to prevent the substance from polymerisation. In effect, stabilisation is effective only when the DVB is loaded at a sufficiently low temperature and
the total journey time to the receiver is short enough. Ambient temperatures must be taken into account.
The guidelines say that the inhibitors most commonly used to prevent polymerisation in DVB require oxygen in order to work and begin to break down and become ineffective at temperatures above 27˚C; some shippers now chill DVB before loading into a tank container and endeavour to arrange transport so that the journey time is short enough to avoid polymerisation.
However, the guidelines strongly recommend that DVB is only carried in drums in a refrigerated container, or in a refrigerated tank container.
One other vital issue that emerged from the MSC Flaminia case is the importance of all parties in the supply chain having access to information on all aspects of the cargo. This should include all assumptions made by the shipper, so that the carrier can make appropriate provisions for the transport of the cargo. HCB
The guidelines are available from the CINS website at www.cinsnet.com/industryguidelines-for-carriage-of-dvb-incontainers-published/.
SAMPLING • IF SAMPLES
ARE TO BE TAKEN FROM TANK CONTAINERS, IT IS NOT THE DRIVER’S JOB. HOWEVER, IF NEEDS BE, IT CAN BE DONE, AS LONG AS SOME STEPS ARE TAKEN
that their own personnel are being called upon to tank samples, which opens them up to risks from working at height and exposure to product vapours.
ITCO’s guidance document stresses that shippers and receivers should arrange sampling by their own properly trained and qualified personnel or by specialist cargo surveyors. ITCO strongly recommends that tank operators and service providers should not undertake sampling themselves.
However, ITCO recognises that there could be situations where a tank operator or service provider might agree to carry out the procedure, and its document sets out some of the steps that it recommends be taken to minimise risks to its personnel.
considerations, procedures, and the liabilities that have to be taken into consideration. They make it clear that operators and service providers need to be aware of their liabilities and seek legal advice on a range of issues, including their obligations to train personnel and maintain training records; their obligations if instructing a third party, such as a transport company’s driver; contract terms and insurance; errors or omissions in the procedures; and their duty in the event of lost or unidentified samples or the deterioration or contamination of samples.
THE INTERNATIONAL TANK Container Organisation (ITCO) has issued guidance to tank container operators and service providers on safety issues surrounding the sampling of substances being carried in tank containers or portable tanks. ITCO says the practice is increasing and its members report
In particular, the operator/provider should obtain written instructions from the cargo owner as well as a safety data sheet (SDS), and undertake a risk assessment. Only properly trained and qualified personnel should be used and expert advice should be sought before any hazardous operation is undertaken.
The ITCO guidelines themselves, which are quite brief, fall into three sections: safety
Clearly, if the guidelines are to be followed, an employee of a tank operator or service provider cannot simply respond positively to a request from a consignor or consignee to undertake the sampling operation. Any such request needs to be referred back to the company or companies involved so that the necessary measures can be put in place.
Indeed, the guidelines say that the shipper or receiver making any such request needs to have a documented sampling procedure with detailed instructions on all aspects of the operation, and provide training to those carrying out the procedure.
The ITCO guidelines do cover some aspects of the recommended procedure. For instance, they say that a valid SDS must be available and personnel need to be aware that some substances that are not deemed dangerous goods for transport do have hazardous properties that see them regulated under workplace safety legislation. Operatives need to be fully protected against those hazards, as well as any other hazards arising from the site or the tank itself. Tanks should be equipped with a sampling valve; ITCO is insistent that sampling via an open manlid or other opening is not recommended, although it says that a sampling adapter may be fitted to the valve.
It is also important to ensure that the sample collection vessel is fit for purpose and compatible with the substance being sampled; operatives also need to be aware of any regulations that would apply to the sample itself when being transported off-site. HCB
The full text of the ITCO guidelines can be downloaded from the Organisation’s website, www.itco.org.
the basis of a proposal from Dave Brennan (IATA), it was agreed to copy over the list of outer packagings from the Model Regulations.
THE INTERNATIONAL CIVIL Aviation Organisation’s (ICAO) Dangerous Goods Panel (DGP) Working Group of the Whole held its 18th session (WG/18) in Montréal this past 1 to 5 October. The meeting was chaired by Micheline Paquette (Canada) and attended by representatives of 15 states, the International Air Transport Association (IATA), the International Coordinating Council of Aerospace Industries Associations (ICCAIA) and the International Federation of Air Line Pilots’ Associations (IFALPA), and observers from five other states and seven organisations.
The main task of the meeting was to begin work on the 2021-2022 edition of the ICAO Technical Instructions for the Safe Transport of Dangerous Goods (TIs). As such, it was faced with a wide-ranging agenda with proposals for amendments in various sections of the TIs. This report concentrates on issues that made progress during the meeting; there was plenty more business with less immediate impact on the TIs, some of which may reappear later in the year.
Packing Instruction 620, which applies to infectious substances of UN 2814 and 2900, does not contain a list of permissible outer packagings. This seemed to be an oversight, as such a list was added to P620 in the 17th revised edition of UN Model Regulations. On
Another apparent editorial error had been spotted in 5;2.4.1.1, which allows smaller text for the UN number and ‘UN’ or ‘ID’ on small packagings. While it is clear that it applies to packages of 30 litres capacity or less, the words ‘or less’ are missing from references to ’30 kg maximum net mass’ and ‘cylinders of 60 litres water capacity’.
There was no opposition to changing the text but it was noted that the UN Model Regulations have the same text as the TIs and therefore it would be a good idea to submit a paper for a similar amendment. It was too late to submit a formal proposal to the last session of the UN Sub-committee of Experts but the chair of that Sub-committee said that and amendment might be accepted through an informal document. The Working Group also noticed that a similar situation exists in 6;2.1.1 and 6;6.4.1; the secretary would ensure that these would be included in the paper to the Sub-committee.
Special Provision A5 identifies that solids with an inhalation toxicity that assigns them to Packing Group I are forbidden on passenger aircraft. This special provision is assigned to
all Division 6.1, PG I entries. However, it had been spotted that when the new UN 3535 entry for toxic solid, flammable, inorganic, nos had been adopted in the 2019-2020 edition of the TIs, Special Provision A5 had not been assigned. It was agreed that this was an oversight; a corrigendum to the 2019-2020 TIs would be issued.
Special Provision A87 allows articles, when shipped unpackaged, to be offered for transport without the marks and labels that are normally required in accordance with Parts 5;2 and 5;3. It had not been assigned to the new UN 3530 entry for machinery and engines and this seemed to be an oversight. Again, the argument was accepted and a change will be made by means of a corrigendum.
The inner packaging requirements for nonrefillable metal receptacles (aerosols) in 6;3.2.7.1 show a maximum capacity of 820 mL; however, the maximum capacity for nonrefillable metal aerosols and gas cartridges in Packing Instructions 203 and Y203 is 1 litre. A proposal was made to revise the packing instructions to align with the 820 mL limit. While there was support for aligning the quantities, the Working Group generally thought that it would be better to align them to the 1 litre limit in the packing instructions. Some recalled that the 820 mL limit was introduced in the first edition of the TIs on the basis of industry practice at the time; it was also suggested that the provisions might benefit from a more comprehensive review, as the references to codes for aerosols may no longer be needed. The proposer would review the subject with other interested parties with a view to bringing a revised proposal to the next session.
Passengers are allowed to carry one self-inflating personal safety device, with the approval of the operator; it was proposed that this should be increased to four devices. It was argued that the use of such devices is increasing; further, the current provisions do not limit the number of approvals an operator may grant, meaning it is theoretically possible for every passenger to carry a device. There was some support for the proposal but many did
not appreciate the justification given, fearing it could set an uncomfortable precedent. A revised proposal is planned for the next session.
Packing Instruction 950, which applied to UN 3166 engines and vehicles powered by flammable liquid, allowed the fuel tank to contain some residual fuel and specified that diesel engines did not need to be drained.
When the new UN 3528 and 3530 entries were adopted in the 2017-2018 TIs, they were assigned to Packing Instructions 378 and 972, respectively; these new packing instructions did not contain the same allowances.
It has become apparent that there are some large machines being transported by air that can only be transported in an upright position; it was proposed that the same fuel allowances should be available for machinery.
The proposal was partly successful, and the Working Group agreed to add the following text to the paragraph for flammable liquid fuel tanks (P378) and liquid fuel tanks (P972) under ‘Additional Packing Requirements’:
When it is not possible to handle in other than an upright position, machinery must be drained of fuel as far as practicable, and if any fuel remains, it must not exceed one-quarter of the tank capacity.
An amendment was proposed to introduce more prescriptive separation provisions in the Supplement to assist competent authorities in the granting of approvals or exemptions to transport explosives normally forbidden for transport by air. At present there is no guidance on specific distances or methods of separation, meaning there is inconsistency. Most of the Working Group saw value in the proposal but some difficulties were identified; work will continue via correspondence with a view to a new proposal being brought before the next meeting.
A substantial revision to the training provisions was proposed, to address concerns that had been raised by the removal of Tables 1-4 and 1-5 in Part 1;4. Their removal had been agreed by DGP in October 2017, a decision that was confirmed by ICAO’s Air Navigation Commission (ANC). However, it does present problems when the tables were used as a tool to qualify training and, although some guidance has been developed, the proposer felt the need for more specific action. The proposal also included detailed requirements for instructor qualification. »
The proposal received little support; the proposed provisions were seen as being too prescriptive and in conflict with the competency-based approach to training and assessment being adopted by ICAO. Some also expressed disappointment that such changes were being proposed after the many years of effort it had taken to draw up the competency-based provisions. There were, on the other hand, some who saw value in having a standard approach to validating training programmes, something that the competencybased approach will lose. The proposer said the comments raised would be considered and that the matter could usefully be discussed through the DGP working group on training.
Another paper proposed reducing the threemonth ‘window’ allowed for recurrent training in 1;4.2.3 to a one-month period. The aim was to align the provisions in the TIs with the window period in other training provisions applicable to pilots, crew and dispatchers.
The proposal did not gain much support; it was felt that the three-month window has been in place for many years and works well. There are also multimodal implications for some parties. It was also noted that individual companies are at liberty to implement a shorter window period if they so choose.
Another proposal suggested adding competencies for state employees responsible for granting approvals and exemptions for shipping dangerous goods normally forbidden for air transport. It was recognised that there is a need for such competencies to be included but the proposed approach did not meet with approval. Instead, the working group on training will take the matter up.
As ever, the Working Group was faced with yet more proposals for amendment to the provisions for the carriage of lithium cells and batteries and other energy storage devices. First, though, it heard from the chair of the SAE G-27 Lithium Battery Packaging Performance Committee with an update on the work being undertaken towards the publication of a standard.
A fifth draft was to be discussed at a meeting early in November and it was hoped that a final draft could be voted on in early 2019. The Committee had identified a need for validating tests to be carried out and plans were in hand.
Some issues that were still being discussed included tests for oversized batteries, generic packaging to allow for a wide variety of cells
and batteries to be shipped in a given package without testing each package and cell/battery combination, and packaging containing different configurations of cells from the ones that had been subject to the test standard.
An issue of particular interest to the aviation industry is the threat of an external fire on packages of lithium batteries. There were mixed views on whether or not the threat needed to be taken into account in the standard. An external fire sub-group was established to consider the threat and recommend a course of action.
The Working Group, recognising that the final standard will still need to be evaluated by the DGP, discussed how the standard might be incorporated into the TIs, although there were those who felt this premature. However, it was clarified that the Working Group was at this point just generating ideas. Comments were particularly encouraged with respect to marking, labelling and the need for traceability.
Further discussions by the Working Group related to the carriage of portable electronic devices (PEDs) containing lithium batteries by passengers and crew, the risk of PEDs in checked baggage, the use of power banks, and recommendations stemming from »
discussions by the Cargo Safety Group (CSG), which had been established to respond to concerns of increased safety risks resulting from security measures that restricted the carriage of PEDs to checked baggage, introduced by some States in March 2017.
While there had been some proposals resulting from these discussions at earlier meetings of the DGP and Working Group, the meeting was not able to agree any amendments. Nevertheless, on the basis of data collected from a questionnaire sent to states and operators, some felt strongly that the incident record and results of tests carried out by the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) supported the need for action on PEDs in checked baggage.
After lengthy discussions, the Working Group concluded that there is a need to raise awareness of the risks involved in PEDs and power banks; that there is a need for more data; and that criteria for determining an acceptable level of safety need to be established.
Talk turned to the telephone number that is required on the mark for Section IB and II batteries. Some felt the requirement is vague: who should provide “additional information” and under what circumstances might this information be needed? The Working Group was invited to determine the intent of the requirement.
Most considered that the number would be used to contact the shipper for further information on a particular consignment of lithium batteries, and only during normal working hours. It seems, though, that most large shippers are providing a 24/7 emergency response line. The chair of the UN Subcommittee of Experts reminded the Working Group that this marking requirement reflected an earlier version of Special Provision 188 in the UN Model Regulations, which provided relief from the lithium battery regulations for these consignments. Under SP188 there was no need for a mark but a telephone number
was required, though not a 24/7 line. It was clear that there is some confusion over the intent of the requirement and a proposal may be made at the next session to clarify the situation.
Special Provision A88 and Packing Instruction 910 apply to pre-production prototype lithium batteries and cells being transported for testing; by definition, they have not at this point been subject to the 38.3 test in the UN Manual of Tests and Criteria.
There were three proposals for amendment to A88 and P910. The first suggested moving P910 from the Supplement to the TIs, where it provides guidance to states considering granting an approval, to make it more transparent for shippers; this would allow for more efficient processing of approvals. There was little support for the idea, although the Working Group did feel it would be worthwhile to develop a framework to bring more transparency into the process. The DGP Working Group on clarifying state oversight responsibilities will take up the idea.
The second proposal suggested extending the provision in P910 that allows lithium batteries with a mass of 12 kg or greater to be packed in strong outer packagings or protective enclosures, to equipment containing lithium cells or batteries. There was no agreement on the amendment as proposed but the Working Group admitted that P910 could benefit from clarification and that a review was warranted. A revised proposal would be made at the next session.
The third proposal involved the shipment of large batteries, in excess of 400 kg, for testing.
This is permitted under A88 but not under P910 and it was proposed that provisions for large packagings should be added. It was felt that, as P910 is taken from the Model Regulations, there needs to be a multimodal discussion of the idea.
Special Provision A154 applies to lithium batteries identified by the manufacturer as being defective; the Panel had already spotted that it does not align with the corresponding SP 376 in the Model Regulations and that the provisions in the TIs were potentially less restrictive. In the meantime, the UN Subcommittee has agreed changes to SP 376 that will require further revision to A154. While there were no objections to this, the chair of the UN Sub-committee said it might be premature to incorporate revisions to A154 as an addendum as the new text of SP 376 would only be finalised at the next session.
Further work will be needed as it was noted that Packing Instructions 965 to 970 also contain provisions for damaged and defective batteries and these would need to be looked at. A proposal will be worked up for the next meeting of the Working Group.
Section II batteries enjoy an exception from the requirement to report undeclared and misdeclared dangerous goods by virtue of P965 to P970. The same applies to Category B biological substances (P650) and genetically modified micro-organisms/ organisms (P959). It was suggested that these exceptions be removed, recognising that undeclared and misdeclared items of these UN numbers still pose a risk in air transport and should be reported.
There were no objections to this change and the necessary amendments were agreed. However, one member of the Working Group queried whether the packing instructions are the appropriate place for the reporting provisions: the packing instructions are primarily of interest to the shipper, whereas it is likely to be other parties in the transport chain that identify undeclared or misdeclared dangerous goods. This apparent anomaly will be given future consideration.
Clarification was sought on the applicability of P965 and P968 in cases where the watthour rating of the battery falls within the limits of Section IB but the rating for each component cell does not. When the question had been raised (several times) at the UN Sub-committee, the explanation was always that the cell and battery limits were to be applied independently. However, the Working Group recognised the need for greater
clarification. A member volunteered to take the issue back to the UN Sub-committee.
The chair of the DGP Working Group on clarifying states’ responsibilities in Annex 18 of the Chicago Convention gave an update on its work, following a meeting in London in July 2018. It is attempting to strike a balance between The TIs, Annex 18 and, with the help of the DGP Working Group on Reporting, Annex 19, which deals with safety management. It was apparent that states are aware of the eight critical elements identified as the essential components of a state safety oversight system in Annex 19 and the need to establish a state safety programme, but they are not necessarily aware of how these apply to their responsibilities in relation to the safe transport of dangerous goods by air. It was believed that establishing a relationship
between Annex 18 and Annex 19 with respect to state safety management responsibilities would provide clarity.
A draft document had been drawn up, identifying common terminology, inconsistencies and potential ambiguities; work on this will continue, which will include recommendations for amendments to Annex 18.
The DGP Working Group on Reporting was also working on a document, with guidance on reporting and investigating dangerous goods incidents. This again needs further work and the Working Group hoped to be able to have it ready for the DGP meeting in September 2019.
A development that will perhaps have a more direct impact on industry is the potential for freight forwarders to be brought under the scope of the TIs. It is widely recognised that freight forwarders play an important role, not just in moving goods but in preventing undeclared dangerous goods from entering »
the transport chain. They are not, however, required to be trained.
It was noted that air transport processes have changed substantially since the TIs were first introduced and that freight forwarders are now performing many of the functions that were originally performed by operators. Undeclared dangerous goods are routinely discovered by operators, and it was believed assigning responsibilities to freight forwarders not intending to handle dangerous goods would help reduce these occurrences.
This matter will clearly involve the ANC as well as the Cargo Safety Sub-group of the Flight Operations Panel and a multidisciplinary approach will be needed.
The Aviation Security Panel had provided DGP with guidance material it had developed on dealing with chemical, biological or radiological events and attacks. That document had been circulated earlier and the Working Group had a number of comments. Some of these had already been addressed and an updated version of the document, taking note of comments made by various groups, would be published internally.
The meeting was invited to consider whether provisions were needed to clarify if operators not approved to carry dangerous goods as cargo could accept dangerous goods that were not required to be formally identified by way of marks, labels or documentationsuch as mail - that may contain dangerous goods permitted by the TIs, or other dangerous goods offered as cargo that are not fully subject to the Technical Instructions. The idea generated various comments and queries and further work will be undertaken to draw up firm proposals.
An interesting discussion followed presentation of the draft of new provisions on remotely piloted aircraft. It was noted that drones are sometimes used to move dangerous goods, particularly during responses to humanitarian crises, but also that there are many issues to be considered before such aircraft can be routinely employed to carry dangerous goods. This topic will no doubt generate much more work in the coming years.
The new ICAO/Universal Postal Union (UPU) Contact Committee had held its first meeting
in March 2018 in Berne, Switzerland. The chair of the Committee outlined the scope of discussions, which included issues related to the security screening and detection of dangerous goods prohibited in the mail, methods of identifying lithium batteries in the mail, and problems in some states arising from national legislation on privacy. ICAO and UPU will continue to collaborate in the development of best practices and training material.
There was a suggestion to provide an exemption for small quantities of lowhazard consumer items such as perfume and nail polish, which might free up resources to focus on more hazardous items, including lithium batteries. However, it was felt that such a move would be premature, as many states are still implementing controls. HCB
The next, 19th session of the ICAO DGP Working Group of the Whole is scheduled to take place in Montreal in the first week of April 2019. A report on that meeting will be carried in a forthcoming issue of HCB.
ROAD/RAIL • THE JOINT MEETING OF RID/ADR/ADN EXPERTS HAS BEGUN WORK ON THE 2021 EDITIONS OF THE REGULATIONS; THERE ARE ALREADY PLENTY OF CHANGES IN STORE
various sets of regulations that govern the transport of dangerous goods in Europe (and, increasingly, elsewhere) by the surface modes: RID (rail), ADR (road) and ADN (inland waterways). The Joint Meeting exists to ensure harmonisation as far as possible between those three sets of rules, with each modal body left to agree the regulations that address mode-specific issues.
THE AUTUMN 2018 Joint Meeting of the RID Committee of Experts and the Working Party on the Transport of Dangerous Goods (WP15) took place in Geneva from 17 to 21 September. The meeting was chaired by Claude Pfauvadel (France) with Helmut Rein (Germany) as vicechair. It was attended by representatives of 23 full members, the European Commission (EC), the EU Agency for Railways (ERA), the Organisation for Cooperation between Railways (OSJD) and 13 non-governmental organisations.
The main aim of the meeting was to start work on the 2021 amendments to the
As is the usual procedure, documents relating to the transport of dangerous goods in tanks were passed over to the Working Group on Tanks, which met for the first three days under the chairmanship of Arne Bale (UK).
France sought to include a requirement in 6.8.2.1.8 for a type 3.1 certificate in accordance with EN 10204 for the construction material of the tank shell. The Working Group noted that, although a reference is included in the tank construction standards, the latest revision of EN 14025 no longer includes it. It was agreed
that it would be more appropriate for the reference to a type 3.1 certificate to be in the test standard rather than 6.8.2.1.8.
In the meantime, it was suggested that the Working Group on Standards agree to add a note in the table in 6.8.2.6.1, against EN 14025:2018, reading: Materials of shells shall at least be attested by a type 3.1 certificate issued in accordance with standard EN 10204.
Another paper from France followed up on earlier discussions on standards that were due to be updated. The revisions had not been available in time to be included in the 2019 texts of the regulations, which will, according to the French paper, have serious consequences for competent authorities, inspection bodies and tank manufacturers. France felt it would be deleterious if standards that had been drawn up in 2017 were to be held back until the 2021 texts and, if the usual procedure is followed, become mandatory only in 2023.
After discussion in plenary, it was decided that it was not feasible to introduce a reference to EN 12972:2018 before the 2021 edition of RID/ADR. However, the 2007 edition is no longer in line with the regulations, so it was suggested that the UN Economic Commission for Europe (ECE) and the Intergovernmental Organisation for International Carriage by Rail (OTIF) should publish guidance on their website to urge competent authorities to approve as soon as possible the use of EN 12972:2018 for the testing and inspection of tanks according to 6.8.2.7.
A paper from the Netherlands addressed tank codes and calculation pressures for fibrereinforced plastics (FRP) tanks. Although only a few countries had experienced problems, most experts supported a clarification of the requirements for these tanks. As a result, a new paragraph was added in Chapter 1.6; in ADR this will appear as 1.6.3.100.2, with the existing two paragraphs under 1.6.3.100 being merged; in RID it will appear as a new 1.6.4.55. The ADR text reads: FRP tanks constructed before 1 July 2021 in accordance with the requirements in force up to 31 December 2020 but which do not, however, meet the requirements for the marking of the tank code of 6.9.6.1 applicable as from 1 January 2021 may continue to be marked in accordance
with the requirements applicable up to 31 December 2020 until the next periodic inspection after 1 July 2021.
The RID text is the same except that it refers to ‘FRP tank-containers’.
A new third indent is added in 6.9.6.1. In ADR this reads: - where a tank code is required in accordance with 6.8.2.5.2, the second part of the tank code shall indicate the highest value of the calculation pressure for the substance(s) permitted for carriage according to the type approval certificate.
The RID text reads: - the second part of the tank code shall indicate the highest value of the calculation pressure for the substance(s) permitted for carriage according to the type approval certificate.
An informal document from the Netherlands introduced a new technology designed to absorb the kinetic energy of a liquid in a tank during deceleration. The system consists of a gas-filled bag that occupies the ullage space inside the tank, preventing the movement of the liquid. It is said to eliminate the pulse in the liquid during deceleration and also to prevent sideways sloshing during cornering, reducing the risk of the vehicle overturning.
The presentation raised several issues and prompted interested discussion. It was
felt that there were some particular issues pertaining to the carriage of dangerous goods that needed to be considered in more detail.
The International Tank Container Organisation (ITCO), in an informal document, raised an issue of definition. Currently, the definition of a tank-container/portable tank operator is the enterprise that has registered the tank; in practice, however, many tank containers are registered by investment companies that lease tanks to operators. In RID, the definition also applies to operators of tank-wagons, where the word ‘keeper’ is also used.
ITCO was invited to submit an official document for a future session, at which point a decision could be made.
The UK reported on the ongoing work of the informal working group on the inspection and certification of tanks, which is aiming to develop an administrative system to allow for national systems for the appointment of inspection bodies, as an alternative to accreditation according to EN ISO/IEC 17020.
The European Commission raised some concerns about terminology, while on a broader basis it was pointed out that the current proposals seemed to be more appropriate for ADR than RID and that more work would be needed to address the periodic inspection of tank wagons. The informal working group was due to meet again in December, with the aim of submitting a definitive proposal at the spring 2019 session of the Joint Meeting.
Switzerland proposed an amendment to 1.4.3.3(e), which currently requires the filler of a tank, battery-wagon/battery-vehicle or multiple-element gas container (MEGC) to check that the tank is not overfilled. However, 4.3.2.2.4 also prescribes a »
minimum degree of filling for certain tanks. It was agreed that it would make sense to delete the word ‘maximum’ from 1.4.3.3(e), twice, to oblige the filler to also observe the minimum degree of filling, where applicable.
Waste tanks The UK, in an informal document, returned to the inconclusive discussions at the previous session as to whether 6.8.2.1.28, which concerns the protection of equipment mounted on top of vacuum-operated waste tanks, is completed or modified by requirements in Chapter 6.10. As this paper was being discussed, it was apparent that there are very different approaches to the topic; also, demountable tanks and tank containers may have different requirements. It was decided that, if discussion of this subject is to continue, it would be useful if an official document could be presented at the next session; the UK offered to oblige.
Battery-wagons/vehicles and MEGCs consisting of tanks must be periodically
inspected at intervals specified in 6.8.3.4.12 to 6.8.3.4.6. The latter paragraph only applies to cryogenic tanks and, as refrigerated liquefied gases are not permitted in battery wagons/ vehicles and MEGCs, the normal periodicity in 6.8.2.4 should apply. It was agreed that, in the penultimate sentence of 6.8.3.4.12, reference to 6.8.3.4.6 should be deleted, so that it will now read:
Battery wagons/vehicles and MEGCs the elements of which are tanks shall be inspected according to 6.8.2.4.2 and 6.8.2.4.3.
In an informal document, Poland highlighted the difference between the requirement in 4.3.2.3.7 that tanks, batterywagons/vehicles and MEGCs filled before the date of expiry of the last periodic inspection may be carried for a period not to exceed one month, and the provision in 6.8.2.4.3 that allows the intermediate inspection to be performed up to three months after the specified date.
It was agreed that there is an inconsistency; Poland was invited to submit an official document to standardise the two provisions with a three-month allowance.
The Joint Meeting was advised by the European Committee for Standardisation (CEN) that a new systems of harmonised standards consultants (HAS) was introduced on 1 April 2018; so far, no HAS consultant with suitable experience in dangerous goods matters has been identified. After an exchange of views, the Joint Meeting asked the CEN representative to check whether a suitable candidate could be found to continue the work done prior to the new arrangements in verifying the compatibility of draft standards with the requirements of RID/ADR/ADN. An update will be provided at the spring 2019 session.
The Working Group on Standards met during lunch breaks and made a series of proposals that were adopted by plenary.
In the table in 6.2.4.2, the text in column (3) is changed to “Until 31 December 2022” against UN 1802:2002 (except annex B) and EN 1968:2002+A1:2005 (except annex B); a new line is added underneath for EN ISO 18119:[2018] Gas cylinders – Seamless steel and seamless aluminium-alloy gas cylinders
and tubes – Period inspection and testing. This standard is mandatory from 1 January 2023. There is a Note attached: Notwithstanding clause B.1 of this standard, all cylinders and tubes whose wall thickness is less than the minimum design wall thickness shall be rejected.
The text of Note 3 to 6.2.3.5.1 is amended to read: The check of 6.2.1.6.1 (b) and the hydraulic pressure test of 6.2.1.6.1 (d) may be replaced by ultrasonic examination carried out in accordance with EN ISO 18119:[2018] for cylinders and tubes of seamless steel or seamless aluminium alloy. Notwithstanding clause B.1 of this standard, all cylinders and tubes whose wall thickness is less than the minimum design thickness shall be rejected. A new transitional provision is added at 1.6.2.16:
The requirements of NOTE 3 of 6.2.3.5.1 applicable until 31 December 2020 may continue to be applied until 31 December 2022. In 6.2.4.1 under ‘For design and construction’, the text in column (4) against EN 12807:2008 is amended to read “Between 1 January 2009 and 31 December 2022”. A new line is added underneath for EN 12807:[2019].
For ADR only, in 6.8.2.6.1, under ‘For design and construction of tanks’, the text in column (4) against EN 12493:2013+A1.2014+AC 2015 (except Annex C). A new line is added underneath for EN 12493:2013+A2.2018 (except Annex C). There is a consequential amendment in TT11 in 6.8.4(d).
As the Working Group on Tanks had already highlighted, some standards that should have been referenced in the 2019 texts were not ready in time and will have to be held over to the 2021 editions. The Working Group on Standards recommended that, in those cases, a one-year transitional period should be allowed, except for EN 12972, for which the Working Group on Tanks urged a six-month transitional period.
In 6.8.2.6.1, under ‘For design and construction of tanks’, the text in column (4) against EN 14025:2013+A1:2016 is revised to read: “Between 1 January 2017 and 31 December 2021”. Two new rows are added underneath for EN 14025:2018 and EN 12972:2018.
In 6.8.2.6.2, the text in column (4) against EN 12972:2007 is replaced by “Until 30 June 2021”. A new row is added underneath for EN 12972:2018, which will be mandatory from 1 July 2021.
For ADR only, in 6.8.2.6.1, under ‘For equipment’, the text in column (4) against EN 13317:2002+A1:2006 is changed to “Between 1 January 2009 and 31 December 2021”. A new row is added underneath for EN 13317:2018.
In 6.2.4.2, the text in column (3) against EN 1440:2016 (except Annex C) is replaced by “Until 31 December 2021”. A new row is added underneath for EN 1440:2016+A1:2018 (except Annex C), which will be mandatory from 1 January 2022.
Also in that paragraph, the text in column (3) against EN 16728:2016 (except clause 3.5, Annex F and Annex G) is replaced by “Until 31 December 2021”. A new row is added »
underneath for EN 16728:2016+A1:2018, which will be mandatory from 1 January 2022. In 6.2.4.1, under ‘For closures’, the text in column (4) against EN ISO 17871:2015 is replaced by “Between 1 January 2017 and 31 December 2021”. A new row is added underneath for EN ISO 17871:2015+A1:2018.
Ammonium sulphide
Spain returned with an official submission after initiating discussion at the spring 2018 session on the hazard identification number (HIN) for UN 2683 ammonium sulphide solution. Spain contended that ‘836’ would be more accurate than the ‘86’ currently assigned, as two subsidiary hazards are recognised for the entry in the Dangerous Goods List. Although there had been some opposition last time around, at the autumn meeting it was agreed that the change should be made.
Germany had come up against a problem: how to apply the mixed loading prohibitions in 7.5.2 when packages contain dangerous goods for which no danger labels are prescribed in the Dangerous Goods List (in this case UN 2211 and 3314). Germany felt that the only
restriction that was justified was to prohibit their mixed loading with explosives.
The Joint Meeting agreed with Germany’s argument but, rather than amend 7.5.2.1, adopted a new special provision applicable to those UN numbers:
675 For packages containing these dangerous goods, mixed loading with substances and articles of Class 1, with the exception of 1.4S, shall be prohibited.
Germany had noticed that special provision 556 had only ever been assigned to UN 3207 Organometallic compound, or solution, or dispersion, water-reactive, flammable, nos.
This UN number had been deleted as from 1 January 2005 but SP 556 is still there.
The Joint Meeting agreed that this was an oversight and deleted SP 556.
The European Aerosol Federation (FEA) proposed to amend the text in 6.2.6.1.5 to increase the maximum allowed internal pressure of aerosol dispensers from 1.32 MPa to 1.5 MPa (at 50˚C), to align the provisions in RID/ADR/ADN with amended provisions in the EU’s Aerosol Dispensers Directive (75/234/EEC).
The Joint Meeting, after some discussion, agreed to the change but invited FEA to consider the need to address the matter from a multimodal perspective. FEA should, it was felt, take the proposal to the UN Subcommittee of Experts. Nonetheless, it was agreed to amend the first sentence of 6.2.6.1.5 to read:
The internal pressure of aerosol dispensers at 50°C shall exceed neither two-thirds of the test pressure nor 1.2 MPa (12 bar) when using flammable liquefied gases, 1.32 MPa (13.2 bar) when using non-flammable liquefied gases, and 1.5 MPa (15 bar) when using non-flammable compressed or dissolved gases.
UN 1010 butadiene
Spain had noticed that the proper shipping names for UN 1010 differ in the UN Model Regulations and RID/ADR/ADN. Spain had done some detective work and identified the source of the divergence; it had also determined that there have been no problems in the US with the carriage of UN 1010. Also, the introduction of 2.2.2.2.1 into RID/ ADR includes a general requirement for the carriage of chemically unstable gases.
The Joint Meeting noted that the UN Model Regulations specifically restrict UN
1010 to mixtures with more than 40 per cent butadiene, whereas RID/ADR have no such restriction, albeit it seems that butadiene mixtures with less than 40 per cent butadiene are not shipped. In general, the proposal received support but it seemed that more work was needed. Spain was invited to return with a proposal identifying the nos entries that might be used if mixtures with less than 40 per cent butadiene were to be shipped and to check whether they have multimodal applicability.
The Council on Safe Transportation of Hazardous Articles (COSTHA) proposed an amendment to Chapter 3.4 that would allow consumer goods falling under the limited quantity provisions to be shipped using the retail display pack as the outer packaging, up to a maximum gross mass of 550 kg. This would be in line with the provisions in the US Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR).
The proposal drew opposition on a number of grounds, not least that 550 kg is far greater than the current 30 kg limit. Also, would such packs pass a drop test? How would enforcement agencies ensure that dangerous goods packaged in this manner were in fact destined for retail distribution? COSTHA’s representative said the views expressed would be taken into account and the Council would consider submitting a proposal to the UN Sub-committee of experts.
Russia, ever alert to the potential for RID/ ADR/ADN to become dominated by the EU states, sought deletion of the references to three elderly EEC directives in 6.2.4.1. On the one hand, Russia said that an EU directive is a legislative act and cannot be treated in the same way as a standard, which can have applicability outside the borders of the EU. What is more, these three directives, 84/525/ EEC, 84/526/EEC and 84/527/EEC, are no longer in force. This, in Russia’s view, not only violates the principles of legal practice but also has the potential to mislead.
The Joint Meeting reiterated its earlier opposition to the deletion of these references, not least on the basis that there remains a significant level of demand for cylinders
designed and constructed in accordance with the technical specifications of the annexes to the three directives. Some delegations suggested adding a note against the references to clarify the position. Pending further action, and while CEN is developing a standard, the following note has been added against the references to those directives in column (2) of the table in 6.2.4.1:
Notwithstanding the repeal of the directives 84/525/EEC, 84/526/EEC and 84/527/EEC as published in the Official Journal of the European Communities No. L300 of 19.11.1984 the annexes of these directives remain applicable as standards for design, construction and initial inspection and test for gas cylinders. These annexes may be found at: https://eur-lex.europa. eu/oj/direct-access.html.
Austria noted a discrepancy between the reporting requirement in 1.8.5.1 and the obligations described in 1.4.2 and 1.4.3. It seems that, if an incident occurs during unloading, it is not the unloader but the consignee who is responsible for making the report. Austria felt this stemmed from a time when the regulations had not yet included provisions for the unloader. Its paper proposed replacing “consignee” with “unloader” in 1.8.5.1.
The Joint Meeting was of the opinion that “consignee” should not be deleted; however, it did see the merit in adding “unloader”, inserting that after “carrier” in 1.8.5.1. The debate also raised further questions about the different roles and responsibilities in the transport chain and the different practices allowed in various countries. It was felt that this was a topic that might usefully be addressed by an informal working group. The spring 2018 Joint Meeting had already discussed the establishment of such a group, following an ERA report on risk assessment in the transport chain. France volunteered to take the lead in organising the work.
Germany proposed amending 2.1.3.4.2 to provide uniform conditions of carriage for used articles containing polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and other halogenated »
compounds, consigned under UN 2315, 3151, 3152 or 3432, that are contaminated with substances of Division 6.1. Such articles include transformers and condensers; packing instruction P906 provides non-design type-approved packagings or unpacked carriage in metal trays, which allows large devices to be carried.
In Germany, national provisions have been applied, which requires such devices to be classified as toxic and assigned to UN 2810 or 2811. However, it may be the case that there is a measure of international transport and it would be useful to have a consistent approach.
The Joint Meeting agreed and, with some amendment, adopted the German proposal to add a new 2.1.3.4.3: Used articles, e.g. transformers and condensers, containing a solution or mixture mentioned in 2.1.3.4.2 shall always be classified under the same entry of Class 9, provided: (a) they do not contain any additional dangerous components, other than polyhalogenated dibenzodioxins and dibenzofurans of Class 6.1 or components of packing group III of classes 3, 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 5.1, 6.1 or 8, and
(b) they do not have the hazard characteristics as indicated in 2.1.3.5.3 (a) to (g) and (i).
Lithium battery label
Russia proposed amending 5.2.2.2.1.3 and 5.2.2.2.1.5 to avoid the repetition of information and simplify the presentation of requirements for wording included on labels. The Joint Meeting noted that Russia had already presented a similar proposal to the UN Sub-committee of Experts and felt that it would only be proper to act once that Sub-committee had made its decision.
Germany had spotted some inconsistencies in the wording of special provision 386, introduced into RID/ADR/ADN in 2017, and the reference to 2.2.41.1.17. The Joint Meeting agreed that the reference in SP 386 should point to 2.2.41.1.21 and made that change.
In RID/ADR, 6.2.3.6.1 allows the conformity assessment of valves and other demountable accessories on non UN refillable pressure receptacles to be carried out separately from the receptacles themselves. However, as France had noticed, there is no corresponding provision in 6.2.2.11 for UN pressure receptacles; in an informal paper, it urged harmonisation of the two paragraphs.
The Joint Meeting agreed with the idea and asked France to prepare an official proposal for the next session.
The European Industrial Gases Association (EIGA) updated the Joint Meeting on ongoing discussions on the mutual recognition of pressure receptacles between the US and RID/ADR/ADN states. Its paper included draft text for inclusion as a new 1.1.4.7. EIGA will continue to work with interested parties in Europe and the US with a view to submitting a final proposal at a future session.
The informal working group on telematics had met in London in early June and agreed a memorandum of understanding to support the development of a harmonised system for the use of electronic transport document in light of 5.4.0.2 and 5.4.1. The MOU does not create a regulatory obligation and no issues related to its implementation had been identified. Some delegations were worried by the lack of information on functional requirements and technical specifications; they also considered that activities on telematics currently under development at European level should take account of the work being done by the
informal working group. The group’s next meeting was lined up to take place in Vienna in November.
Romania and the International Union of Railways (UIC) reported on progress being made by the informal working group on the drafting of definitions for ‘risk’ and ‘hazard/ danger’, which had met in the Hague in June. The group had reviewed the English, French and German texts of RID, ADR and ADN and identified all the places where these words were used; it also identified places where they might usefully be replaced by something else so as to avoid confusion.
The Joint Meeting welcomed the results of the work but suggested that Romania bring the proposed changes to the attention of the UN Sub-committee of Experts. The Joint Meeting, wary of making changes to the Instructions in Writing too frequently, opted to hold some suggested changes until the next time other amendments are made, although Romania pointed out that a proposal to amend footnote b in the Instructions had been placed before WP 15; this change, if adopted, would have a twoyear transitional provision.
The Joint Meeting invited Romania to prepare an official proposal for the next session, even though the informal working group is not due to meet again until mid-June 2019.
Germany reported on a road accident that occurred in February 2018: a semi-trailer carrying three vats of molten aluminium skidded and overturned on the A38 motorway between Grosswechsungen and Bleicherode; one vat was damaged in the crash and spilled most of its load – some 5,400 kg of molten aluminium at 800˚C. The driver received minor injuries in the accident, which caused material damage estimated at some €270,000. Around 100 m² of road surface had to be replaced. Germany sought to open discussion on whether some regulatory action might be warranted.
The Joint Meeting noted that such transport takes place in several countries and is currently addressed differently at the national level. It invited delegations to provide Germany
with information on the types of approvals and authorisations granted in their countries so that a document might be prepared for a future session.
The secretariat had continued work to identify all the places in ADR that refer to a ‘competent authority’, with the aim of establishing unequivocally which competent authority or authorities are being referred to in each case. Its work had expanded to include the concepts of ‘country of origin’, ‘country of destination’, ‘country of carriage’ and ‘country of use’.
The Joint Meeting decided that this needed to be considered by an informal working group. It invited interested delegations to propose terms of reference for the group at the spring 2019 session.
The International Road Transport Union (IRU) gave a presentation on e-learning for transport operators, which identified a number of current e-learning programmes and reviewed the existing legislative background. It was noted that e-learning is addressed differently at the national level and there were those who were of the opinion that the decision to allow e-learning for RID/ADR/ADN purposes, as well as the definition of the conditions under which a training body could be approved to deliver such training should be left to the discretion of the competent authorities. Others considered that it would be beneficial to define a general framework in RID/ADR/ADN.
The Joint Meeting invited IRU to continue work on the topic and to make a formal proposal both to the Joint Meeting and to the modal authorities.
The Joint Meeting was informed that Helmut Rein was attending for the last time before his imminent retirement. The Joint Meeting expressed its appreciation for his work over more than two decades and wished him a long and enjoyable retirement. His place as vice-chair will be taken by Silvia García Wolfrum (Spain), at least for 2019. HCB
The spring 2019 session of the Joint Meeting will take place at the headquarters of the Universal Postal Union (UPU) in Bern, Switzerland from 18 to 22 March.
AFTER A SUCCESSFUL inaugural event in 2017, the Dangerous Goods and Dangerous Materials (Gefahrgut & Gefahrstoff - GGS) trade fair and conference will open its doors again at the Leipziger Messe, Germany from 9 to 11 April 2019. The event also includes the European Dangerous Goods Days on 10 and 11 April, organised in collaboration with the European Association of Dangerous Goods Safety Advisers (EASA).
“The events will provide dangerous goods officers from all over Europe the opportunity to further educate themselves and establish an international network, while also providing an impetus for additional developments in regulation,” says Dr Norbert Müller, global dangerous goods coordinator at Schenker AG and former president of EASA, who is
in charge of the content of the European Dangerous Goods Days. “It’s undeniable,” he adds: “dangerous goods officers guarantee safety in the transportation of dangerous goods. This is particularly true when dangerous goods are moved internationally. Nothing works without cooperation.”
As such, the event is designed to offer visitors more than just a wide range of solutions, products and services for the transport of hazardous goods, internal logistics for hazardous substances and maximum safety when handling highly sensitive goods and substances. The industry platform’s conference programme at Leipziger Messe also features solution-oriented events that provide added technical value, including new features this year.
During the conference sessions, well-known speakers from several European countries will present information on the latest amendments to the international regulations (ADR, RID, IMDG Code and IATA DGR) effective as of 2019, discuss the transport of lithium batteries and answer questions as to what a dangerous goods officer needs to know about the transport of explosive and radioactive goods, and much more.
As happened last year, the Leipzig Dangerous Goods Day will also be held during GGS. This 24th instalment will take place on 9 April at the Congress Center Leipzig and will once more be organized by TÜV SÜD Auto Service GmbH, the Leipzig Chamber of Industry and Commerce and TÜV SÜD Akademie GmbH. All participants receive a certificate of attendance.
This topic for this year’s Leipzig Dangerous Goods Day is: The ADR 2019 amendments are in effect! How do they benefit the user? Important changes at a glance. How do GGVSEB and RSEB help?
Jörg Holzhäuser from the Ministry of the Interior, Sports and Infrastructure of Rhineland-Palatinate will be among the speakers on this topic.
Also on the schedule for the three-day GGS will be sessions on hazardous waste and its disposal. The Forum for Hazardous Waste Disposal, which is organised by bvse-recyconsult GmbH on behalf of the Bundesverband Sekundärrohstoffe und Entsorgung (bvse), will hold two public events on 10 and 11 April, covering the potential hazards in wastes and the correct means of handling them.
The German Dangerous Goods Association, Gefahrgutverband Deutschland, will also hold three lectures during the conference sessions.
The first, ‘ADR and GbV’, will cover topics such as the packaging requirements for dangerous goods and the tasks and task management of the dangerous good officer. The second session will be on RID and inland vessels and
will cover, amongst other things, Germany’s Explosives Act (Sprengstoffgesetz), and the transport of dangerous goods in inland vessels and rail wagons. On the last day, the focus turns to air and sea issues, including presentations on dangerous goods checks at airports – their problems and causes, and the maintenance, repair and reprocessing of combination IBCs.
In addition to the formal presentations, GGS will feature a number of short demonstrations and lectures inside the exhibition hall. These presentations by exhibitors will highlight the diversity, competence and practical relevance of the goods and services on show.
With the GGS event, Leipziger Messe has created an industry platform for suppliers and users that it, it says, unique in Europe.
The trade fair’s product profile brings together products and services for the
transport, storage and internal logistics of hazardous materials with highly sensitive and safety-relevant requirements in the associated logistics chain. Visitors can receive proposals for solutions that increase the economic efficiency of their logistics processes and ensure maximum security at the same time.
Leipziger Messe reports that the demand for exhibition space is already well above last year’s. “The preparations for the second edition of the GGS are well underway,” says project director Matthias Kober. “We are very satisfied with the registration status. In addition to the many repeat participants, we are pleased to welcome some interesting new exhibitors from every product sector.” HCB
Those interested in learning more about GGS can find all the relevant information at www.ggstradefair.com. HCB will be attending this year’s event and will report back with news of interest to our readers.
Would the headline ‘Man sets himself on fire at gas station’ grab your attention? How about ‘Naked man sets himself on fire at gas station’? It certainly grabbed our attention.
But the truth was harder to fit into a headline: ‘Naked man tries to set himself on fire at gas station in New Jersey but covers himself in diesel rather than gasoline and couldn’t get it to light’.
We don’t know from reports whether the man involved, said to be from Ohio, was high or depressed or just plain dumb, but he has in any case been charged with risking widespread injury.
Being a postman is not the safest job in the world but, in the US at least, they do have some protection – particularly from angry dogs. Apparently posties (or ‘mail carriers’ as they are called these days) are issued with a spray that dogs don’t like. If they are faced with an aggressive dog, the spray will send it packing.
Of course, such sprays can be hazardous –they are aerosols, for a start, and presumably also contain some sort of irritant. As was made clear last month at a post office in Pocahontas, Arkansas, where a bunch of the stuff went off – it is not clear how – and sent 17 people to hospital.
It can’t be much fun to suffer from psoriasis, to be covered in dry and itchy skin. And, as it turns out, even the treatment can be hazardous. The UK’s Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) has issued a warning after more than 50 deaths have been reported. It appears that the emollient creams used to soothe the pain
of psoriasis can build up in fabrics and make it easier for them to catch fire.
It was initially thought that certain emollients that have a paraffins content of more than 50 per cent were the most dangerous but MHRA now says that all emollients, including those that are paraffin-free, pose a risk. A BBC report cited the case of one poor chap who accidentally set himself on fire at Doncaster Royal Infirmary, when sparks from a cigarette ignited his clothing. MHRA now wants hazard communication on packagings with advice on how to minimise the risks.
A massive explosion in Liverpool in March 2017 that caused “utter devastation” and injured 81 people was an ‘insurance job’ gone wrong, according to police. A man has been charged with causing the blast and fraudulently claiming on his insurance.
The accused ran a furniture shop in New Ferry which, the prosecutor told Liverpool Crown Court, was on the point of bankruptcy. It is alleged that the owner had sold off much of his stock in the weeks before the explosion. Investigation found the blast was caused by a build-up of gas in the building; it is alleged that the owner had deliberately removed an emergency control valve and allowed gas to escape, in the expectation that it would find an ignition source.
Indeed it did, causing an explosion that destroyed or damaged 63 properties nearby and blew in the front of a busy Chinese restaurant, showering diners in glass and rubble. The prosecutor summed up the situation: “This was an insurance job, but perhaps one that, given the scale of what happened, went badly wrong.”
The case continues.
