Concerns are rising about hazardous cargo. Bans on Galaxy Note 7 smartphones by airlines mark the latest flashpoint in a debate on how to reduce risks from carrying dangerous goods, but there are also worries in the maritime sector.
Troubles with Samsung’s Galaxy Note 7 have reignited the debate on lithium batteries. After faulty batteries on some units went ablaze, several airlines, including Finnair, Qantas, Aeroflot and Air Canada, have banned the smartphone from their cargo holds.
Samsung has recalled 2.5 million of the smartphones in at least 10 countries and promised to send replacements out as quickly as possible.
Airlines that knowingly carry the version with potentially defective batteries or shippers that send them as air freight would be breaking IATA’s Dangerous Goods rules, which mandate that “lithium batteries identified by the manufacturer as being defective for safety reasons, or that have been damaged, that have the potential of producing a dangerous evolution of heat, fire or short circuit are forbidden for transport (for example those being returned to the manufacturer for safety reasons).”
Some airlines, such as Cathay Pacific, have already banned bulk shipments of lithium batteries.
The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) issued an interim ban on lithium-ion battery shipments on passenger aircraft, which came into effect on April 1. According to ICAO, it will stay in force until a new, safer packaging standard has been established.
The ban has been criticized by battery manufacturers and some shipper organizations. Many airlines have refrained from comment. According to IATA, about 400 million lithium-ion batteries are produced every week. Most of them are shipped by ocean carrier, but a small contingent goes by air.
Much of the opposition to bans has revolved around the issue of undeclared battery shipments, which are seen to pose a greater risk. In a joint letter sent in early August to ministers of trade, industry and transport, and directors of civil aviation in the world’s largest lithium battery producing countries, IATA, the Global Shippers Forum, the International Air Cargo Association and several battery manufacturer interest groups called for lithium battery safety regulations to be enforced at the point of origin, including the initial shipper and the battery manufacturer.
The US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) appears bent on stepping up enforcement. It recently hit a company that had tendered a shipment of 30 four-ounce ‘Fryer Boil-Out Foaming’ tablets made of corrosive sodium hydroxide for air transportation from Florida to North Carolina to UPS with a US$54,000 fine.
The amount and the fact that a shipper was punished (usually the FAA metes out fines to carriers, who then deal with clients who have tendered hazmat cargo without proper identification) suggest that the administration is sending out a signal, one airline executive commented.
In June the FAA slapped a US$350,000 penalty on Amazon, after the company had tendered a package containing a one-gallon container of “Amazing! LIQUID FIRE,” a corrosive drain cleaner, for air transport to UPS. DHL was fined US$455,000 for seven hazardous materials violations back in February.
“It’s like the Wild West where some companies, lacking in logistics expertise, make serious mistakes in the shipping process, such as unwittingly sending hazardous material via air freight without the benefit of knowledgeable, trained shipping professionals who can provide the necessary advice in adhering to regulations and keeping the flying public safe,” remarked Brandon Fried, executive director of the US Airforwarders Association.
“As e-commerce volumes increase, shippers will likely experience an increase by the FAA in vigorous enforcement of hazardous material regulations to avoid similar occurrences,” he added.
IATA has warned about hazardous materials being shipped without proper declarations in mail. The rapid growth of e-commerce, drawing in many merchants with scant or no knowledge of hazardous goods regulations, has heightened concerns about this.
Concerns about misdeclared hazmat shipments are not confined to air cargo. According to mutual insurance association P&I Club, mis-declared cargo is responsible for 27% of incidents on ships, second only to poor packaging.
Cargo insurance firm TT Club recently issued a warning about hazardous cargo. Peregrine Storrs-Fox, the company’s risk management director, pointed out that risk assessment surveys at ports over the last 12-18 months have found “worryingly little adherence to segregation requirements for dangerous goods.”
He pointed to the explosion at Tianjin port a year ago, which resulted in insured losses between US$2.5 and US$3.5 billion. “It underlines how cargo in transit, potentially mis-declared, or packed or handled incorrectly, can cause widespread damage and loss of life,” he said.
By Ian Putzger
Correspondent | Toronto