What are three 4-ounce tubes of an adhesion promoter worth?

The FAA says they are worth $60,000 as a proposed fine when they are shipped as undeclared dangerous goods and the shipper failed to train his hazmat employees properly.

Would you pay $70,000 for a leaking one-gallon can of paint?

That is the proposed fine for a company with untrained employees who shipped the paint by air as undeclared dangerous goods.

Between February 2 and June 2, 2000, the FAA has issued 35 fines totaling $3,547.000.

Yes - that is three million! The fines were assessed for those three tubes as well as oxygen generators and a number of other dangerous goods. These are not the only fines issued by the FAA. Only the fines of $50,000 or higher get that notoriety. Many smaller fines are simply not publicized. $25,000 fines are not all unusual for non-compliance of the dangerous goods regulations.

Why are the fines getting higher? How come, all of a sudden, more undeclared dangerous goods are being caught? The Research and Special Programs Administration and the FAA realized that the fines had to be increased in order to get the attention of top management of corporations as well as private individuals engaged in shipping dangerous goods.

Both administrations suffered from prior budgetary cutbacks and primarily due to the ValuJet accident it became apparent that enforcement activities suffered. Additional personnel were hired and RSPA started training Customs Inspectors. More government personnel are now concentrating on the safe transportation of dangerous goods.

Also, as more airline personnel are being trained more thoroughly they are catching more undeclared dangerous goods. The additional FAA Hazmat Inspectors and newly trained Customs Inspectors are having an increasing impact on the carriers. The cargo personnel are resisting pressures from cargo sales personnel to “forgetaboutit”. And, as more airline cargo agents are now into third or fourth or more recurrent training cycles they have developed a sense of when things are not just right. And they are gaining confidence in resisting internal and external pressures to ignore the problem. How can we make statements like that? The airline personnel tell us every single day. And they tell other airline employees as well. If you don’t believe it, hang out at your local airport’s favorite watering hole for airline employees and just tune in on their conversations.

What is the root of the problem? Failure to appreciate the dangers involved has to be the primary reason. The time and effort in preparing dangerous goods properly is certainly one of the causes. The cost of training personnel is also a factor. The risk of delays and frustration over rejections is an issue. And the cost of actually shipping hazmats sometimes makes the choice to deliberately cheat a worthwhile gamble. Higher and higher dangerous goods fees by the airlines pretty much guarantees that a small percentage of irresponsible shippers and forwarders will take the gamble and cheat.

In early March two of our executives attended a joint HMAC/PIRA Dangerous Goods Conference in Amsterdam. Representatives of UPS, Lufthansa, and Sabena agreed that ignorance and fraud were the two main reasons for undeclared dangerous goods. The solutions have to be training and enforcement. The situation is not improving - it is getting worse. Some airlines are now quietly rewarding their cargo handlers for spotting undeclared dangerous goods. National and International Transportation Laws require carriers to notify the appropriate enforcement agency when undeclared dangerous goods are discovered.

But the gamble is really not about money. Undeclared dangerous goods are really gambling with lives and property. And that cannot be tolerated.

Back to classifications.....

Since we started these newsletters on the website we have tried to present the hazard classes in a format that is less complicated and easier to understand without being a chemist (or a regulator). We will continue this approach in future newsletters but for now, let’s review some of the important items related to the hazard classes we have already covered.

Explosives, Class 1 - if shipped into, through, or exported from the United States, the shipper must possess a valid Competent Authority Approval issued by the U.S. Department of Transportation, Research and Special Programs Administration, Office of Hazardous Materials Exemptions and Approvals. The approval is in writing and uses an “Ex” Number to specifically identify the explosive article that was tested. That “Ex” Number must also be marked on the package. The “EX” number should also be inserted in the authorization column of the dangerous goods declaration for air shipments. A photocopy should accompany the other documents related to the shipment. When the explosive was tested, the testing included the packaging technique. The method of packaging, if changed, would require additional testing and the issuance of a new approval. Likewise, if the explosive article’s design or content of explosive substances was changed, a new approval would be required. The approval identifies, based upon testing, the Proper Shipping Name, Hazard Division Number, a Compatibility Letter (“A” thru “S”), the UN Identification Number, and, usually, for air shipments, the appropriate Packing Instruction Number from the ICAO Regulations. The approval remains valid indefinitely unless the article has changed in design, content, or packaging.

We will pick up again with these reviews in the next issue of the newsletter as well as continuing with our attempts to get the classification system into understandable language. We hope this is helpful. Reminder: In the United States, oxygen cylinders can no longer be shipped on passenger-carrying aircraft or in inaccessible areas of all cargo aircraft unless the cylinders are packaged in ATA Specification 300 packages.

Even with the ATA Spec.boxes you are limited as to the number of cylinders that can be placed in inaccessible baggage/freight compartments on the aircraft. Other restrictions also apply. Refer to U.S. D.O.T. HM 224A, issued on August 19, 1999 and became effective on March 1, 2000.