Carriage of Dangerous Goods

Advert

Carriage of Dangerous Goods

Home Forums The Tea Room Carriage of Dangerous Goods

Viewing 25 posts - 1 through 25 (of 32 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #623928
    Samsaranda
    Participant
      @samsaranda

      Today I received a package containing 6 x 500 ml containers of Spirit of Salts, that’s 3 litres total volume, spirit of salts being a dilution of Hydrochloric Acid. The package arrived wrapped in black plastic with only an address label on the outside, there were no warning labels as to the contents being an acid, the interior wrapping consisted of some bubble wrap over a cardboard box. The carrier was Parcelforce and the supplier was a company on EBay. I was under the impression that the carriage of dangerous substances required certain conditions to be complied with and that Royal Mail particularly would refuse anything that they classify as dangerous, batteries, liquids etc. As Parcelforce is I understand an offshoot of Royal Mail do they have similar requirements, I know that they refuse to carry the small replacement rechargeable lithium batteries that my wife’s Cochlear Implant uses, they come via DPD and all other spares that she needs come Royal Mail or Parcelforce. Dave W

      Advert
      #37060
      Samsaranda
      Participant
        @samsaranda
        #623933
        Nicholas Farr
        Participant
          @nicholasfarr14254

          Hi Dave, according to their prohibitions and restrictions acids are banned, Parcelforce (Help & Advice)

          Regards Nick.

          #623937
          DiogenesII
          Participant
            @diogenesii

            It is selfish of me, I know, but I do appreciate *the value implicit in the idea that I may be able to* 'send out' for fuels & other substances that might otherwise require one to purchase & collect them in person.

            With the greatest of respect, may I offer the suggestion that publicising this issue on an open forum may well result in an adverse outcome?

            Can't we sweep this discussion under the carpet? smiley

            Edited By DiogenesII on 07/12/2022 17:50:33

            #623941
            Samsaranda
            Participant
              @samsaranda

              Hi Nick thanks for the reference I couldn’t find it, the reference is very clear it’s a definite No to the carriage of corrosives no matter how they are labelled and Spirit of Salts is definitely Hydrochloric Acid at greater than 25% concentration. I am amazed that Parcelforce actually delivered a package that is banned by their own regs but in their defence they probably rely on their customers to declare the contents of parcels truthfully. Highlights potential disasters waiting to occur. Dave W

              #623942
              Oldiron
              Participant
                @oldiron

                I bought the very same thing several months ago on Ebay and that also was delivered by Parcelforce. No warnings at all on the package. To be honest I never gave it a second thought.

                regards

                #623943
                SillyOldDuffer
                Moderator
                  @sillyoldduffer

                  Posted by DiogenesII on 07/12/2022 17:46:49:

                  Can't we sweep this discussion under the carpet? smiley

                  Too late! Samsaranda has spilled the beans! Though there may not be any beans to spill.

                  'Spirits of Salts' is a hopeless old-fashioned generic name. The contents are dilute Hydrochloric Acid, but can be anything from an almost harmless domestic cleaning product to an industrial handle-with-care strong acid.

                  Only strong Hydrochloric Acid is worrying, and it's rendered safe by adding water. A spillage of dilute Hydrochloric Acid is unlikely to be a terrifying chemical accident.

                  Dave

                  #623949
                  Anonymous
                    Posted by DiogenesII on 07/12/2022 17:46:49:

                    With the greatest of respect, may I offer the suggestion that publicising this issue on an open forum may well result in an adverse outcome?

                    Any worse than publicising it by clearly marking the contents on the package?

                    #623959
                    Samsaranda
                    Participant
                      @samsaranda

                      The definition of Spirit of Salts is greater than 25% Hydrochloric acid, I wouldn’t rate exposure to that as trivial, the fumes are strong enough to cause serious respiratory problems and can also corrode metals when in confined spaces, so something that I would show a great deal of respect to how I handle it. Perhaps SOD would like to dip his hands in it to show it’s not that dangerous! Dave W

                      #623964
                      Michael Gilligan
                      Participant
                        @michaelgilligan61133

                        Nick’s link takes us directly to ‘the rules of the game’ … and it seems abundantly clear that somewhere in the chain, those rules are being ignored.

                        MichaelG.

                        #623967
                        john halfpenny
                        Participant
                          @johnhalfpenny52803

                          I don't get this thread. Dave W knows there are rules about posting hazardous substances. Nevertheless, he orders such product, and then is not happy that it is delivered . Cakeism? Merry Xmas

                          #623976
                          Steambuff
                          Participant
                            @steambuff
                            Posted by john halfpenny on 07/12/2022 20:32:31:

                            I don't get this thread. Dave W knows there are rules about posting hazardous substances. Nevertheless, he orders such product, and then is not happy that it is delivered . Cakeism? Merry Xmas

                            The point Dave is making is that the goods were sent with NO WARNING LABEL on the parcel indicating their contents.

                            I have received hazardous substances in the past and they had a Hazardous warning label indicating the contents. Some carriers will carry these goods for a increased cost. (Others won't)

                            Dave

                            #623978
                            Robert Atkinson 2
                            Participant
                              @robertatkinson2
                              Posted by DiogenesII on 07/12/2022 17:46:49:

                              It is selfish of me, I know, but I do appreciate *the value implicit in the idea that I may be able to* 'send out' for fuels & other substances that might otherwise require one to purchase & collect them in person.

                              With the greatest of respect, may I offer the suggestion that publicising this issue on an open forum may well result in an adverse outcome?

                              Can't we sweep this discussion under the carpet? smiley

                              Edited By DiogenesII on 07/12/2022 17:50:33

                              That is a highly irresponsible attitude.
                              Shipping restrictions are there for a reason, for the safety of everyone. Leakage of acid can cause damage to other packages, injury to postal workers including blinding or at a worse case an aircraft crash. Even within the UK the Royal Mail use arcraft and more than one aircraft crash and many incidents have been caused by incorrectly shipped hazardous cargo.

                              john halfpenny
                              Dave W has every reason to expect that when he orders hazardous material that they will be properly packed, marked and sent by a suitable courier.

                              This nd similar incidents should be reported. For Royal Mail you can do it here

                              https://www.royalmail.com/report-a-crime

                              Robert.

                              Edited By Robert Atkinson 2 on 07/12/2022 22:27:19

                              #623984
                              Marcus Bowman
                              Participant
                                @marcusbowman28936

                                Here's a variation on this theme:

                                If someone orders an electronic device which contains a lithium battery, it can be posted quite legally via Royal Mail or any courier service provided the battery is inside the device. But if you order a battery on its own, it cannot legally be sent by post or couriered.

                                This means buying a replacement battery for, say, a phone must be done in a shop.

                                Not realising this, I ordered a replacement battery via Amazon. It came via courier, in the usual Amazon way, and it carried a large warning label. It turns out Amazon have a special contract with the couriers.

                                Unfortunately, Amazon sent me the wrong battery. So I contacted them and they told me to send it back and they would sent the correct battery. They sent a Returns email which allowed me to print a large warning label for the return. I now know it is impossible to send a battery by post, and none of the courier services will touch it either. After exhaustive enquiries, I phoned Amazon. They knew of the problem and simply said 'Just dispose of it'. Fine; but when I tried to order another battery of the correct type they declined the sale.

                                You can buy them from eBay, via France, where they are advertised openly. How they can send it to you, I do not know, as I decided there are far too many fakes out there which don't have any significant capacity, so left it alone. I'm not fussed about a mobile phone most of the time, so I went back to my ancient £9 Nokia, whose battery still has life after umpty tumpty years. It' so old that the man in the local FONE shop just laughed when I asked for a replacement battery. How he gets his batteries is a mystery.

                                Marcus

                                #623986
                                Nicholas Farr
                                Participant
                                  @nicholasfarr14254

                                  Hi, I've never used spirit of salts, but I understand it's fairly powerful stuff. Back in 1966 we moved house, and the lavatory bowl in our new home had a thick unsightly brown stain covering the bottom and up a little above the water line, it was so bad that even strong bleach wouldn't shift it, so while all of us kids were at school one day, our dad got some spirit of salts from a local chemist and cleaned the bowl with it. When we came home and saw it we thought we had got a new bowl, as it was so bright and clean and not a trace of a brown stain in sight.

                                  Regards Nick.

                                  #623989
                                  Samsaranda
                                  Participant
                                    @samsaranda

                                    John Halfpenny, Robert summed up the situation accurately, I ordered an item that although hazardous can legitimately be sent by carriers with proper labelling and with carriers who are willing to carry such items and have systems to deal with them. In my case I had no knowledge which Carrier that the retailer was going to use, I assumed that he would be organising the carriage in a lawful manner with a carrier who had a system that catered for recognised hazardous materials, it transpired that did not happen. It appears that there are many cowboy outfits that are willing to put people at risk by not conforming to what legal constraints are in place for protection. Dave W

                                    #623990
                                    not done it yet
                                    Participant
                                      @notdoneityet

                                      Perhaps SOD would like to dip his hands in it to show it’s not that dangerous! Dave W

                                      10% hydrochloric acid is OK to dip your hands in – as long as they are rinsee off reasonably quickly, and you don’t have sensitive skin or cuts, etc. Not recommended as a general pastime, mind. 25%+ concentration would quite quickly cause redness, I would imagine. Only concentrated hydrochloric acid fumes.

                                      thick unsightly brown stain covering the bottom and up a little above the water line, it was so bad that even strong bleach wouldn't shift it

                                      Nick,

                                      Bleach is an oxidising agent, so not designed to dissolve water hardness salts (with all sorts of inclusions). A strong acid will quickly dissolve calcium carbonate – and a load of other things, too!

                                      Edited By not done it yet on 07/12/2022 22:57:17

                                      #623991
                                      not done it yet
                                      Participant
                                        @notdoneityet

                                         Double posted instead of editing!

                                        Edited By not done it yet on 07/12/2022 22:56:58

                                        #623998
                                        Jelly
                                        Participant
                                          @jelly

                                          Whilst certainly a breach of ParcelForce's conditions of carriage, this is not a meaningful breach of the ADR agreement as implemented by the Carriage of Dangerous Goods Regulations.

                                          • In Table 3.2 of the 2021 ADR agreement, (available online on the UNECE website) there are two entries for Hydrochloric Acid (UN 1789) depending on the "packing group" a catagorisation which indicates the hazard posed and would be linked to concentration.
                                          • For UN1789, PG II (the higher classification of hazard) column 3.4 indicates that the "limited quantity" is 1L (it's 5L for weaker Acid catagorised in PGIII).
                                          • Under the limited quantity regulations, goods may be packaged in "inner packagings" of Plastics or Metal (or Glass/Stoneware where required for chemical compatiability with corrosive liquids) up to the volume specified in column 3.4 of table 3.2
                                          • The inner packagings must then be securely packed into a secure "Outer Packaging" which protects the inner packagings from mechanical damage.
                                          • So packaged, goods are effectively exempted from the requirements of the regulations, so long as the total quantity carried by any one transport unit is less than 8 tonnes, although each package or overpack should display the limited quantities diamond.

                                          You could report this to the VCA and HSE as the shared competent authority, (i think this would fall into the HSE's jurisdiction as it relates to the consignment of goods and labeling, not to the vehicles or transport operations).

                                          But I doubt that they would really care about what is effectively a missing diamond on an otherwise compliant package, and one which would be meaningless to almost everyone other than technical specialists in the field of DG transport anyway…

                                          Certainly it wouldn't be worth it using their resources to take enforcement action.

                                          All the major parcel operators including parcelforce are fully aware that customers routinely and flagrantly breach their conditions of carriage, with respect to liquids and dangerous goods.

                                          Most larger parcel depots will collect several hundred kilogrammes each month of packages which have been identified as non-compliant, (often due to leaking) in dedicated bunded areas, which are subsequently sorted and identified for disposal/recycling by visiting chemists from a number of different specialist firms.

                                          This has been the state of play for well over 15 years now, and it's well known to everyone involved, it's generally only when customers make really egregious breaches (such as sending dangerous goods which aren't packed in limited quantities, or which aren't eligible for that exemption, or cause a near miss where staff could have been harmed) that they will pursue fines or make a report to the competent authority, it simply wouldn't be practical any other way.

                                          #624008
                                          Robert Atkinson 2
                                          Participant
                                            @robertatkinson2

                                            Hi Jelly,

                                            That is all correct. However the OP's delivery failed on a least 3 points:

                                            Over limited Qty (3l)
                                            Not properly packaged
                                            No hazaed markings

                                            Also a lot of carriers, including Royal Mail, have more restrictivce hazardous materials policies.
                                            Typically hazardous liquids would require a durable (metallic or strong plastic) container then a plastic bag, padding and then a strong outer container like a triwall box.

                                            The rules on batteries are quite complex so a lot of carriers just refuse them outright rather than have the processes to deal with them.

                                            Robert G8RPI.

                                            #624011
                                            Samsaranda
                                            Participant
                                              @samsaranda

                                              Jelly, Thanks for your very comprehensive information regarding the subject, it certain answers my enquiry, many thanks. Dave W

                                              #624018
                                              Jelly
                                              Participant
                                                @jelly
                                                Posted by Robert Atkinson 2 on 08/12/2022 08:54:04:

                                                Hi Jelly,

                                                That is all correct. However the OP's delivery failed on a least 3 points:

                                                Over limited Qty (3l)
                                                Not properly packaged
                                                No hazaed markings

                                                 

                                                • The Inner Packagings are 500ml, which is less that the maximum 1L specified in column 3.4 so it does come under LQ.
                                                • It's hard to say without detailed photos, but it does sound like the packagings met the LQ rules (which are much less restrictive than the packing instructions for using inner and outer packages for non-exempt DG's which you described).
                                                • It is missing it's marking but that mark should be the LQ Mark, not a Hazard Diamond

                                                The LQ rules were implemented to allow the easy shipment of dangerous goods packed for retail sale, largely to facilitate Distribution Center to Store carriage by high street retailers and supermarkets, the result is rules where as long as the core inner package size rules are met everything else is very permissive (allowing up to 8 tonnes per transport unit to be exempt under them for example).

                                                .

                                                I have to say as a DGSA this really doesn't feel like a big deal in terms of Road, Rail or Sea modes, as it's effectively a missing sticker which doesn't mean a lot to many people anyway.

                                                Yes, it is technically non-compliant, and yes it does create some level of additional risk, but it isn't liable to cause a major incident of the kind that ADR was intended to control and mitigate…

                                                It's much more of a occupational safety issue for RM (although again, practical experience teaches me that it's unlikely to be as dramatically dangerous as expected).

                                                .

                                                I can see your argument that the IATA DG rules exist for a very good reason and that shipment of DG by air has to be very closely controlled…

                                                But if RM's screening before internal air carriage is so lax that they would allow packages containing unexpected, undisclosed liquids through to load on to a plane, then frankly there are bigger security issues at hand really.

                                                Edited By Jelly on 08/12/2022 10:10:20

                                                #624022
                                                Circlip
                                                Participant
                                                  @circlip

                                                  Not only volatiles and corrosives, Good old RM failed to deliver a couple of bottles of highly dangerous Steam Oil. Strangely enough, they didn't seem top have a problem with Ketone?????

                                                  Regards Ian.

                                                  #624028
                                                  Nick Clarke 3
                                                  Participant
                                                    @nickclarke3
                                                    Posted by Nicholas Farr on 07/12/2022 22:36:53:

                                                    Hi, I've never used spirit of salts, but I understand it's fairly powerful stuff. Back in 1966 we moved house, and the lavatory bowl in our new home had a thick unsightly brown stain covering the bottom and up a little above the water line, it was so bad that even strong bleach wouldn't shift it, so while all of us kids were at school one day, our dad got some spirit of salts from a local chemist and cleaned the bowl with it. When we came home and saw it we thought we had got a new bowl, as it was so bright and clean and not a trace of a brown stain in sight.

                                                    Regards Nick.

                                                    While a student I had a summer job at a campsite/caravan park and to clean the urinals and toilets we used strong Hydrochloric Acid which came in a bottle with its own mop that sat in a cup on the side of the bottle. You poured a bit of the acid into the cup and than dipped the mop into it. A single wipe along the top of the urinal or round the rim of the toilet bowl leaving just an indiscernable amount of acid was sufficient to remove any limescale or staining as it ran down.

                                                    Just before I retired I had to co into the cleaner's cupboard at work for some rubbish bags (the amount of rubbish collected in over 40 years teaching and over 11 at that school!!!) and there appeared to be something very similar on the shelf clearly still in use.

                                                    Edited By Nick Clarke 3 on 08/12/2022 11:23:38

                                                    #624039
                                                    John Doe 2
                                                    Participant
                                                      @johndoe2

                                                      As an (out of work) airline pilot, who amongst other duties spent a season flying cargo for the Royal Mail, and DHL etc, I would urge folk to be safe.

                                                      As part of our extensive pilot training, we do recurrent classroom lectures about Dangerous Goods and have to pass Dangerous Goods exams every couple of years. Dangerous goods must be known about and there are strict regulations about which dangerous goods can be packed next to other dangerous goods – to avoid chemical and physical reactions. So it is vital that the contents are correctly declared, packed and labelled.

                                                      We also do classroom lectures about aircraft fires, and practical fire fighting instruction and tests in aircraft mock-ups.

                                                      Aircraft have crashed and caused loss of life owing to undeclared or badly packaged dangerous goods. Undeclared or incorrectly packaged dangerous goods in aircraft is a definite no-no.

                                                      Sorry for the telling off !

                                                    Viewing 25 posts - 1 through 25 (of 32 total)
                                                    • Please log in to reply to this topic. Registering is free and easy using the links on the menu at the top of this page.

                                                    Advert

                                                    Latest Replies

                                                    Home Forums The Tea Room Topics

                                                    Viewing 25 topics - 1 through 25 (of 25 total)
                                                    Viewing 25 topics - 1 through 25 (of 25 total)

                                                    View full reply list.

                                                    Advert

                                                    Newsletter Sign-up