cci’s department - fremantle seminar 16...amsa are the responsible authority 2. ... containers as...

CCI’s International Trade Department is a one‐stop shop for exporters, importers, and all others engaged in international business.

Our Core Services

Import & Export ConsultancyImport

1. Sourcing2. Training3. Compliance4. Business Matching

Export

1. Export readiness2. Finding Buyers3. Export Market Selection4. Compliance5. Safe Engagement

Assist companies to become export readySourcing from reputable suppliers

Trade Commercial Services

International Marketing

International Legal

Cross Border Accounting

Investment Readiness

E‐Newsletter Package Microsite PR Package Video Package

Social Media Kick‐start Advertising Graphics Graphics Design Logo Package

International Marketing

Cross border tax Withholding Tax advice Setting up foreign office

Controlled Foreign Corporation Profit Repatriation

Double Taxation Agreements Engaging Personnel

Cross Border Accounting

Commercial Contract Help Cross border dispute Resolution

Contract Templates Patent Trademark Arbitration

International Legal

Seeking capital from local and foreign sources to expand business and meet increasing import / export

demand.

Investment Readiness

If it is not about freight:

Let us help you or your customers with international legal, cross border accounting, marketing, export

documents, finding buyers in foreign markets and even investment into your business….

We can add value to your business or your customers’ at Non for Profit rates.

Get in touch:

[email protected]

Michael Pal – Principal Logistics Analyst – Fremantle Ports

Mandatory Verified Weighing of Export Containers Industry SeminarPurpose and Survey Findings

Purpose

16/03/2016 12

A correct weight has always been a requirement Weighing has always been an issue – some countries better than

others Even in Australia, we have weight differences between different

shipping and transport documents There needs to be uniformity – internationally One ship disaster because of mis-declared weights is one too many Customers too want to be sure that they are getting what they paid

for - guaranteed

Purpose

16/03/2016 13

All Export containers will need a verified weigh as of 1July You’ve all been sent the Draft Order On your seats is an overview from Shipping Australia’s perspective

The whole world has had to implement this There was discussion that USA may delay their implementation The US Coast Guard immediately quashed this. They will also need to

be in line 1 July Different countries are looking at this in different ways:

UK has a system to register shippers Others are looking at weighing tolerances

Purpose

16/03/2016 14

We are here for four main reasons:1. To hear from the experts

AMSA are the responsible authority2. To hear from the experts (2)

We have the key International Container Supply Participants who will provide you with their perspective on the requirements

3. To look at some of the methods available4. To get your feedback on key points

…… now to make a start

Survey – current weighing practices

16/03/2016 15

November Port Operations Task Force meeting determined there would be value in finding the scale of task

Main question – current weighing practices Two surveys:

Transport Operators Exporters/Freight Forwarders (Shippers)

Slightly different questions to both

Transport Operator Survey

16/03/2016 16

Respondents and whether they pack for export

Survey sent to 90 Transport Operators

50 operators responded

Of those who responded 32% said they packed some containers for export


16/03/2016 17

Freight all kinds (FAK) Mining, spare parts, ore samples, returned machinery Nickel, cobalt Scrap steel Potatoes and mixed vegetables Household goods and personal effects Liquid

Products packed by Transport Operators include:


16/03/2016 18

13%

87%

Yes

No/Unsure

Based on the 15 respondents who pack export containers

Of the containers you pack for export, is the sale price based on weight of the product in the container?


16/03/2016 19

0 1 2 3 4 5

Weighbridge fixed

Scales on forklifts

Historical estimates

Volumes calculations

Packing lists ‐ customer supplied

Weighing device on packing machine

No answer

Multiple methods

What are your methods of weighing?


How do you determine the accuracy of your weigh practices ?

16/03/2016 20

The tolerance of accuracy ranges from +/‐0.02% to ‐/+10.00%

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

calibrated scales

manufacturers' specifications

periodic testing

reliance on customer supplied information

calibrated + cross check with forklifts

calibrated and certified annually

historically fairly accurate

multiple methods


16/03/2016 21

Most transport operators are not involved in container packing Of those that do, around half likely have methods that cannot be

adequately calibrated There may still be some lack of clarity among those that pack

containers as to what is an acceptable form of “calibrated” weigh

Summary

Exporter Survey

16/03/2016 22

73 responses 98,755 TEU (14/15 FY) – almost 45% of full TEU export volumes in

14/15 FY

24%

76%

Shipper% of TEU volume

No

Yes

Exporter Survey

16/03/2016 23

9%

91%

Sale price based on weight% of Shipper TEU volume

No

Yes

Exporter Survey

16/03/2016 24

Products included:

Activated Carbon Aerospace super alloys Wool Grain Vegetables Scrap metals Personal effects

Meat product Timber Cement Seafood Hay Mineral sands

Exporter Survey

16/03/2016 25

33%

3%64%

Weighing Methods% of Shipper TEU volume

Assess the weight of the contents

Other

Weigh the whole container

100% use a weighbridge –certified/calibrated

Other includes:‐ Supplier information

Export Survey

16/03/2016 26

Nearly all Exporters (91%) already understand themselves to be the “Shipper”

Two thirds weigh the whole container (Method 1) and all use a certified weighbridge (note: 3% still claim to be using another method other than Methods 1 or 2)

Of concern is that of those who assessed the weight of the containers (Method 2) - two thirds used methods which may not be acceptable (volumetric, historical estimates, etc.)

Accuracy levels of the weighing methods ranged (0.002 to +/- 7%) Around a third claimed their accuracy level was calibrated but not

necessarily certified (an issue?)

Summary

Consultation DraftMarine Order 42

Dave Anderson, Head of Section Cargoes and TechnicalE-Mail: [email protected]

From the AMSA home page click on ‘Consultation’ which is in the ‘Community’ tile.https://apps.amsa.gov.au/moreviewUnder open submissions is MO42.

Where can I find the consultation draft MO42?

In addition to the consultation draft Order there are links to the current MO42, a change summary explaining differences between the current and draft Orders, the amended text of SOLAS VI and the guidelines (MSC.1/Circ1475)

Verification of the gross mass of a container to be loaded onto a ship is mostly covered in the drafted section 10, 11 and 12. The requirements have been developed with stakeholder consultation to ensure it not only implements SOLAS requirements, but meets Australian legislative framework expectations

Implementation of the SOLAS requirements in MO42

In summary the draft Order implements SOLAS requirements as follows:1. By use of existing Australian legislation

where possible. Existing Australian and International standards of accuracy for weighing equipment are applied to both method 1 and method 2

2. It approves Method 2 as being the summation method described in SOLAS VI, Regulation 2, paragraph 4.2, with all weights being obtained on equipment meeting the prescribed standards of accuracy

3. A container cannot be loaded onto a ship unless there is a verified gross mass on the maritime shipping document

The circular provides useful guidelines that can assist implementation in each nation. In addition to explaining the SOLAS amendments, it also provides advice about contractual/commercial arrangements that may require review by the parties involved

Notes in draft MO42

The notes in the draft Order identify the circular contents in general and, where appropriate, specific sections of the circular, that may assist parties involved to review their current arrangements and agreements

Draft MO42 was made available for public comment on 10 March 2016 for a period of 7 weeks. Public comment will close on 30 April 2016

MO42 consultation period

The draft Order has been developed taking into account comments received from our stakeholders and by using information from other IMO Members and registered NGOs All comments and information received have helped us to develop the draft Order

Some background to the draft Order development

We considered how others have been implementing the amendments in the respective jurisdictions. Some will implement a ‘registered/approved’ shipper (weighing service provider) regime. Some intend to use only their existing ‘measurement for trade’ legislation

Many have indicated they will implement a ‘fixed percentage’ of the gross mass as a permissible errorThe percentage chosen reportedly varies between +/-2% and +/-5%

Implementation using a registered/approved service provider scheme would require additional regulatory burdens and costs for both those approved entities and for the regulator.

Implementation using only existing Australian trade measurement legislation would require all weighing equipment to be approved and verified under that legislation. This would result in additional costs for all operators of weighing equipment to be used for containers intended to be loaded on ships

Weighing equipment accuracy is expressed in international standards and Australian legislation in terms of the maximum number of increments of error permittedThe error expressed as a percentage of the mass being weighed is therefore larger for smaller masses and decreases as the mass being weighed increases

For example:A forklift with on board weighing capability is in the scope of OIML/NMI R51. Using the lower ‘in service’ standard of accuracy of Y(b), the maximum permissible errors are;• When weighing a mass of up to 50 verification scale intervals (e),

the MPE is +/-1.5 e• When weighing up to 200 verification scale intervals (e), the MPE is

+/-2.5 e • When weighing up to 1000 verification scale intervals (e), the MPE

is +/-3.5 e

Say the forklift capacity is 16,000kg displayed in 100kg increments. The percentages at various weights would be• At 1,000 kg (10 increments), MPE is +/-150 kg = 15%, range

30%• At 7,000 kg (70 increments), MPE is +/-250 kg = 3.57%, range

7.04%• At 11,000 kg (110 increments), MPE is +/-250 kg = 2.27%, range

4.54%• At 16,000 kg (160 increments), MPE is +/-250 kg = 1.56%, range

3.12%

The same can be applied to a weighbridge using Class 4 accuracy in OIML/NMI R76• When weighing a mass of up to 50 verification scale

intervals (e), the MPE is +/-0.5 e• When weighing a mass of up to 200 verification scale

intervals (e), the MPE is +/-1 e• When weighing a mass of up to 1000 verification scale

intervals (e), the MPE is +/-1.5 e

Using the same increments but a capacity of 30,000 kg for illustrative purposes only, the percentages at various weights would be• At 1,000 kg (10 increments), MPE is +/-50 kg = +/-5%, range 10%• At 7,000 kg (70 increments), MPE is +/-100 kg = +/-1.43%, range

2.86%• At 11,000 kg (110 increments), MPE is +/-100 kg = +/-0.91%, range



0.66%

The maximum permissible error is therefore dependant on the type of equipment used. Use of a fixed percentage of error of say +/-2% would result in an error of up to +/-600 kg, a range of 1,200 kg, when weighing a container of 30,000 kg. +/-5% would result in an error range of up to 3,000 kg. Errors of this kind of magnitude, multiplied by the number of containers loaded onto a single ship, are unacceptable for use in ship stability calculations.

The draft Order takes these critical points into account by use of existing Australian legislation and existing Australian and international standards of accuracy

Stakeholders may wish to consider reviewing their current arrangements and agreements with other parties, taking into account the guidance on such matters provided in the IMO guidelines.

During the draft Order consultationperiod

Noting the current SOLAS and MO42 reflect that an accurate gross mass must already be provided on the maritime shipping documents, stakeholders may also consider utilising the standards of accuracy in the draft legislation to assist in gauging if there are any impacts for them

Any comments that stakeholders may have as to how the Order as drafted may effect them may be provided via our online Marienorder consultation pageshttps://apps.amsa.gov.au/moreview

Thank You

Proprietary and Confidential Copyright © 2015 INTTRA Inc. 54

The SOLAS Regulation at a High Level:A verified gross mass (VGM) must be provided before a container can be loaded on a ship. There is no exception to this requirement.

Image Source: JOC article - "Shippers guide to the container weight mandate", Dec 14, 2015.


The SOLAS Regulation at a High Level:Starting July 1, 2016, Before a packed container can be loaded onto a ship, its weight must be determined through weighing.

There are two permissible methods for weighing:

Method 1: Weigh the stuffed container Method 2: Weighing all cargo and contents, and adding tare weight

from container door


Additional considerations for the VGM:

Estimating weight is not permitted.

Weighing equipment must meet local certification requirements

A carrier may rely on a shipper’s signed weight verification to be accurate.

Shipper’s weight verification must be “signed”

Vessel stow plans should use VGM

Implications for containers to be trans-shipped after July 1*

As interpreted by World Shipping Council


Why INTTRA’s eVGM Solution• Market leader with ~24% of global container volume• Building on a network of 41 (major/sub-brand) carrier connections over a 110K

shipper company locations• Industry leading expertise in ocean shipping

Benefits to Submitter1. Submit VGMs to your carriers through one connection (EDI, XML, Online)2. Track VGM declaration status to improve planning3. Allows flexibility to decide how SOLAS VGM compliance should integrate into

their existing workflow and/or business process4. IT investments can then be directed towards best solution to support their users

Benefits to Carrier1. No need to change BK/SI integrations.2. Allows their customer to maintain their existing processes3. INTTRA extracts necessary VGM information no matter how submitted and

delivers in standard VGM message4. Easy access to all submitted VGMs and reporting capability5. Allows carriers to review terminal planning for advanced coordination with

container booking to maximize operational output.


Ocean shipping’s e-marketplace

58

Thank youLydia van der Merwe

[email protected]: +61 41 341 4748

A SHIPS MASTERS POINT OF VIEW

MIS-DECLARED CONTAINER WEIGHTS

CONTAINERS LOADED

CONTAINERS WEIGHED

PAPERWORK ISSUED

CONTAINER LOADED ONTO VESSEL

SHIP DOES STABILITY CHECKS

ALL STABILITY IS OK

VESSEL DEPARTS TO SEA

SHEAR FORCES

TORSION FORCES

January 2007: MSC Napoli: “About 660 containers stowed on deck, which had remained dry, were also weighed. The weights of 137 (20%) of these containers were more than 3 tonnes different from their declared weights. The largest difference was 20 tonnes, and the total weight of the 137 containers was 312 tonnesheavier than on the cargo manifest”

June 2011: Container ship Deneb in Algeciras: The ship in this picture suffered a significant stability incident. A review after the incident found that out of the 168 containers on the load list, 16 – or roughly 1 out 10 –containers had actual weights far in excess of the declared weights. The actual weights exceeded the declared weight in a range from between 1.9 times as much as the declared weight to as much as 6.7 times the declared weight. The total, actual weight of these 16 containers was more than 278 tons above their total, declared weight of about 93 tons or 4 times higher than their declared weight.

February 2007: Container ship MV Limari in Damietta: Container stack collapsed due to stack overweight. The master’s incident report to the authorities notes that: “Excessively heavy units loaded in the upper tiers and that the maximum stack weight had been exceeded considerably in some rows. The effect of the overweight units was to impose excessive forces on the lashings. Further, exceeding permissible weight distribution and/or exceeding the maximum stack weight in any stack, results in overstressed stowage/securing elements and overstressed containers”. The actual container weights were established by the devices on the gantry crane when lifting and shifting the collapsed containers. The actual container weights exceeded the declared weights by 362% (Row 08), 393% (Row 06), 407% (Row 04) and 209% (Row 02) in Bay 52 where the collapse occurred.

February 25, 2011: Longshore & Shipping News – ‘Near miss’ at Australia wharf as 28-ton container falls“The container that fell 12 meters and narrowly missed two workers was severely overloaded and the third accident this month at Darwin Port. Two workers at the Darwin Port had to run to avoid a shipping container crashing onto East Arm Wharf at the weekend, the Maritime Union of Australia says. The container was listed as four tones, but the Maritime Union says it weighed 28 tonnes and exceeded the crane’s load limit.”

May 9, 2011: ABC News Melbourne: An overloaded forklift lies in a container yard in west Melbourne after its load tipped it forward, May 9, 2011.

Marine Order 42 (Cargo stowage and securing) 2003

8 Information for Master

8.1 Requirement for information

8.1.1 Subject to subsection 8.2, before commencement of loading of cargo at a port in Australia, the shipper of that cargo must provide to the master or the

master’s representative appropriate information on the cargo sufficiently in advance of loading to enable the precautions which may be necessary for proper

stowage and safe carriage of the cargo to be put into effect.

B E FOR E

How DPWA will comply with the new regulations

Ben Moke, General Manager | Commercial, VIC, WA, SA, TAS16 March 2016

Mandatory Verification of Container Mass from 1 July 2016

STRICTLY PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL© DP World Australia

• DP World globally welcomes the new SOLAS regulation which will assist in promoting Safety across our terminals for our employees, customers and communities.

• DPWA is not equipped with the specified weighing devices to satisfy the regulators requirements.

• Working together with 1-Stop in Australia, DPWA has jointly developed additional mandatory fields to the PRA process to ensure the information being captured from the Shipper is accurate and supports the requirements from the regulator (AMSA).

• The onus on weight verification is the responsibility of the Shipper, Packer or Freight Forwarder of the goods.

• No container will be shipped unless the VGM is validated prior to entering the terminal

Overview of DPWA’s response to the new SOLAS regulations

Safety First for all, at all timesWe all have a responsibility for Safety. The new SOLAS regulation supports Safety across the supply chain.

• There is no new process for shippers when PRA’ing containers destined for container terminals, only amendments to mandatory fields in current PRA process.

• Amendments are as follows:

• New fields added to indicate which method (method 1 or method 2) used to determine verified gross weight. Shipper must indicate either Method 1 or Method 2 otherwise PRA will not be issued.

• Gross weight field changes to verified gross weight and remains mandatory.

• Name, Company, phone and e-mail fields added which will all be mandatory.

How will 1-Stop capture the VGM information?

Declaration of VGM via the PRANew mandatory fields have been added to 1-Stop to ensure VGM is declared prior to arrival at the terminal

• Once a PRA has been submitted all of the current verification is still undertaken, including verification of the new mandatory fields. If any of the mandatory fields are missing information or cannot be verified then the PRA will be rejected.

• Transport carriers will not be able to manifest a truck without a valid PRA.

• Shippers can alter PRA prior to arrival at the terminal however the PRA must be re-submitted and GW verified.

• Should a shipper wish to amend a weight after the container has been received, the container will be placed on ‘hold’ and moved into storage. The container must be taken out of the terminal via B959 Customs Release, weighed, verified and a new PRA is to be submitted.

• Transhipments:

• All countries fall under the IMO SOLAS Regulations. All transhipments will be taken as verified at the point of Origin with the original weights declared at the Port of Load deemed as the verified weights for transhipment containers

• Empty Containers

• The empty container weight code table in 1-Stop will be altered to reflect an accurate weight for the particular ISO code types i.e. 20’GP, 40’HC, 40’RQ etc

Additional information relating to terminals

Declaration of VGM via the PRANo container will be shipped unless VGM validated prior to arrival at the container terminal

National Landside & Operations Efficiency Manager

P: 03 9680 0892

M: 0419 371 412

E: [email protected]

General Manager | Commercial – NSW, QLD

P: 02 9394 0983

M: 0420 559 530


General Manager | Commercial – VIC, WA, SA, TAS

P: 03 9680 0855

M: 0417 052 786


Greg Winstanley Ben Moke Ravi Sheshadri

Further information

87

Please contact the below DPWA personnel for further advice on how DPWA is complying with the new SOLAS regulations

IMPORTANCE OF CORRECT CONTAINER

WEIGHTS

March 2016

THE ROLE OF THE SHIPPING LINE

• Deliver cargo from port to port in a safe manner by following all International and Local laws and regulations.

• Cargo stowage on vessels is one of the most important factors for assisting vessels and their crew in a Safe sea passage and also providing protection for the cargo from damage and loss.

• Correct cargo stowage is dictated by many things, but the most essential element is the cargo weight.

© Copyright MSC Mediterranean Shipping Company S.A. 89

HOW ARE DECLARED CONTAINER WEIGHTS COLLECTED NOW?

© Copyright MSC Mediterranean Shipping Company S.A.

90

This information also becomes the base for the bill of lading

This information also becomes the base for the bill of lading

These declared weights are used by our planning team

to plan our vessels

These declared weights are used by our planning team

to plan our vessels

Container is packed in accordance with the container payload

Container is packed in accordance with the container payload

Exporter submits Pre Receival Advice (PRA)

Exporter submits Pre Receival Advice (PRA)

PRA details receivedby Stevedore

PRA details receivedby Stevedore

MSC receive an EDI message with Container number,

Weights, etc.

MSC receive an EDI message with Container number,

Weights, etc.

Export Booking is made with MSC

Export Booking is made with MSC

MSC sends the booking detailsto 1‐Stop

MSC sends the booking detailsto 1‐Stop

MSC’s cargo system is updated based on the PRAMSC’s cargo system is

updated based on the PRA

WEIGHT DIFFERENCEPRA / SHIPPING INSTRUCTION

• This process works well until the weight provided on the Shipping Instruction is different to the weight declared on the PRA.

• We will check with the shipper to confirm which one is correct.

• If the Shipping Instruction is correct, we amend the weights on the cargo plan prior to the vessel sailing.

• If the Shipping Instruction is received after the vessel has sailed, we have handled the container based on an incorrect weight. The only change we can make is at the next sea port.


OVERWEIGHT CONTAINERS

• An overweight container is when the cargo weight exceeds the carrying capacity as detailed on the Container Safety Certificate.

• We are running an electronic crosscheck on every container received at the wharf in order to catch any potential overweight containers. The crosscheck uses the weight submitted on the PRA and compares this information with our global container database.

• If the container is deemed to be overweight, the box will be held and the shipper will need to collect the container and remove the excess weight from the container.


MISDECLARED CONTAINER WEIGHTS

• Misdeclared container weights are where the declared weight of the cargo is different to the actual weight.

• This does not mean the container is overweight as the total weight can still be within the allowable weight as shown on the Container Safety Certificate.

• However it does mean that the shipping company is handling the container based on the declared weight and not the actual weight.

• It is impossible for a shipping line to check if a container weight has been misdeclared, but we can see if the vessel is carrying more weight than planned by the vessels sailing condition.

• An extra 10cm of Draft = an extra 600 tonnes of weight (3000 teu vessel)


VERIFIED GROSS MASS OF A CONTAINER CARRYING CARGO

• Two methods are available to verify the gross mass of a container carrying cargo,

1. After packing is completed and the container is sealed, the packed container is weighed to determine a verified gross weight.

2. Prior to packing the container, all individual packages and cargo items, including pallets and any other packing material, are weighed and these weights are added to the tare of the container (which is shown on the door of the container) in order to determine a verified gross weight.

• The weighing equipment must be certified.

• These verified gross weights need to be presented to the ship or their representative and to the terminal representative in advance to allow adequate time for this information to be used in the ships stowage plan.

• Shipping Australia has been working on amending the PRA to allow shippers to provide these verified weights prior to delivery of their cargo to the terminal.


MODIFIED PRA TO INCLUDE A VERIFIED GROSS WEIGHT


SHIP PLANNING


Review current condition of the vessel and taking into account,

• Vessel configuration• Compulsory 20’ or 40’ cells• Ships ability to Russian stow 40’s• Stackweights• Deadweight• Special stows for Reefers, Hazardous, Skin & Hides, Out of Gauge• Limiting restows at the next port• Provide a good working plan at the next port

We can then arrange the stowage plan for the export containers based on the container weights.

VESSELS AT SEA


MV NAPOLI


MV Napoli (built 1991) 4419 teus.In 2007 the Napoli encountered bad weather with seas up to 9m. She suffered a failure in her hull where the Captain took action to save thevessel and ran her aground in the English Channel.

All 26 crew were safe and rescued from their life boat.

The ship was a total loss.

In the review following the incident, it was found that of the 660 containers on deck, 137 units (20%) were more than 3 tonne different from their declared weight, with the largest single difference being 20 tonnes.

MV DENEB


June 2011, the container ship Deneb in Algeciras (Spain) listed and capsized at the berth. This was owing to one out of every ten containers being overweight by a factor of 1.9 to 6.7 times their declared figure.

Thank You


Questions

16/03/2016 102

Initial Questions?

BREAK

Calibrated and Certified Equipment

NMI and OMIL

• OMIL: International Organisation of Legal Metrology

• NMI: National Measurement Institute (Australia)• Definition of the legal units of measurement• Define and approve the measuring instruments

for trade, pattern approvals.• Oversee the testing and verification through

licenced servicing companies

Maximum permissible error

R51 (On-board automatic weighing instruments)• 2000 – 10,000 increments• Maximum error +- 4 Increments • Example, Instrument with 20kg increments • Maximum error +- 80kg• Example, Instrument with 1kg increments • Maximum error +- 4kg

Maximum permissible error

R76 (Non automatic weighing instruments)• Class 3, 2000 – 10,000 increments,

Class 4, 200 – 1,000 increments• Maximum error in service +- 3 Increments • Example, Instrument with 20kg increments • Maximum error +- 60kg• Example, Instrument with 1kg increments • Maximum error +- 3kg

Max permissible error versus accuracy as a percentage

Example:• 50T capacity instrument.• 20kg increments• Under R76 max permissible error +- 60kg• Compare to an instrument with 1%

accuracy, 500kg.

Types of OMIL/NMI compliant Instruments

Approved weighbridgesApproved container scalesApproved pallet scalesApproved fork lift scalesApproved Under body weighing systems

Effects on Instrument accuracy

• Position of use, how it is mounted.• Wind• Operator usage• Lack of instrument servicing and

verification/calibration

Servicing of certified Equipment

• To be undertaken by a provider with a recognised Serving Licence to meet the class of instrument. (NMI servicing licence)

• Must have Certified test masses.• Instrument to be inspected, serviced, and

verified.

Various Trade Approved scales available to weigh sea containers

Methods 1 & 2

Trade Approved forklift scalesworking off the hydraulic pressure –

Method 1

Trade Approved weigh bridge –Method 1

Trade Approved large portable weigh pads –Method 1

Trade Approved sea container weighing frame –Method 1

Trade Approved forklift scalesusing load cells –Method 2

Trade Approved platform scales –Method 2

Various Non Trade Approved scales available to weigh sea containers

Non Trade Approved sea container weighing frame

Non Trade Approved sea container weighing frame with loading ramp

A load cell of the Non Trade Approved sea container weighing frame

Non Trade Approved sea container handling side lifter

Non Trade Approved forklift analogue scales working off the hydraulic

pressure

Trade Approved Conweigh container weighing system –Method 1

Non Trade Approved Bison container weighing system

Budget Pack: FY 13 131

CONTAINER WEIGHT VERIFICATIONPUBLIC WEIGHBRIDGE SOLUTIONToll Intermodal – Wharf Services

Richard Wolton – State Manager WADaniel Lanza – Business Development Manager WA

Date: Wednesday 16th March 2016


LOCATION

• Manoora Close, adjacent to the Truck Marshalling Area (TMA).


WEIGHBIRDGE FEATURES

• 39 metres long

• 150t capacity

• 5 platforms/decks enabling weighing of 5 separate axle groupings

• Fully automated operation

• NMI certified

• Credit Card or Account Transactions available


SOLUTION / THINKING

• Integration with 1-Stop• Link of tare weights to registrations• Photo identification-registration• Container number link to the export Pre Receival Advice (PRA)• 24/7 support available• Electronic automated dockets sent to customers / transport carriers


CHALLENGES

• NMI requirements-tare weight confirmation

• B-Double combinations

• Interface with 1-Stop

• Duty of care


ANY QUESTIONS?

Ener

gy &

Dat

a Tra

nsm

issio

n Sy

stem

s

137

Load Safe – Container Weighing Verification

Ener

gy &

Dat

a Tra

nsm

issio

n Sy

stem

s

138

o An innovativedevelopment uses the spreader twistlocks to weigh containers and to improve safety in container handling.

INPUT fromTwistlock Sensors

Interrogator

Interrogator cabinet

On-board monitor

Solution: Weighing on the Spreader Twistlock

Ener

gy &

Dat

a Tra

nsm

issio

n Sy

stem

s

139

The Twistlock

o The TWISTLOCK can provide viable load and safety information.

o The neutral line of the twistlockis not subject to torsional and bending stresses.

o It’s the best place to measure the load.

Ener

gy &

Dat

a Tra

nsm

issio

n Sy

stem

s

140

Image with empty containers Image with loaded containers

Load displayin the crane cabin

Ener

gy &

Dat

a Tra

nsm

issio

n Sy

stem

s

141

Basic advantages

o On-the-go weighing. No need to interrupt the terminal operation.

o No need for infrastructure changes in the terminal.

o Weighing of each container individually in twinliftapplications.

o Weighing accuracy per container over the full measuring range: +/- 100 kg.

o Maximum allowable load per twistlock is: 100 tons.

o Easy to install on existing spreaders.

o The system fits in every type and brand of spreader.

Ener

gy &

Dat

a Tra

nsm

issio

n Sy

stem

s

142

1. Detect if one or more twistlock is not engaged

2. Trailer lifting detection for ASC applications (for RTGs still under

developement)

3. Container dragging detection (after positioning a container on a stack)

4. Permanent twistlock elongation due to eccessive overload

5. Load cycle and overload cycle counter

6. Container over‐eccentricity detection

7. Data logging and downloading functions

Operational Safety features

Ener

gy &

Dat

a Tra

nsm

issio

n Sy

stem

s

143

Thank you –Please feel free to ask any questions.

A Service Industry development to support new IMO/SOLAS Container weight

verification legislation

Container Weighing “Conweigh”

SOLAS Container weight verification background summary• In January 2007 the MSC Napoli was intentionally beached due to serious damage to the hull.

– Discrepancies between the declared weight and the actual weight of containers aboard the MSC Napoli were partly blamed for the accident by Britain’s Marine Accident Investigation Branch.

• The World Shipping council estimates that on average 2,683 containers are lost at sea each year –2014 WSC Survey spanning years 2008 – 2013.

• November 2014, the International Maritime Organization (IMO) adopted mandatory amendments to the international convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS) Chapter VI, Part A, Regulation 2 – Cargo information. The SOLAS convention is applicable global law.

• The SOLAS amendments become effective on 1 July 2016 for all packed containers received at port for transportation (gate‐in or off rail).

• The vessel operator and terminal operator are required to use verified container weights in vessel stowage plans and are prohibited from loading a packed container aboard a vessel for export if the container does not have a verified container weight.

SOLAS Legislation Overview

• In 2013/2014 Australia exported approximately 2.2 million full containers

• As of July 1, 2016 every exported container will need the mass verified using AMSA certified weighing equipment and methods.

• The shipper of the goods is responsible for obtaining the verified weight of the container, not the port or freight forwarder

• An average of 6000 containers per day need to be weighed in Australia

Weight Verification ExplainedSOLAS Container weight verification background summary

Weight Verification ExplainedHow can the Container be Weight Verified?Method 1, which requires weighing, or have arranged that a third party weigh, the container after it has been packed

Transport Container to Weigh Bridge‐ Additional Time to Shipment

24hr‐ Truck must be tared each day‐ Risk of Overweight Container

on Road‐ Expense $500+‐ Capacity & Through Put Issue

Install Weigh Bridge or Purchase Weighing Equipment‐ Capital Outlay‐ Introduction of Overheads Staff, training, space, etc‐ Calibration & Asset Management + Quality

Conformance audits‐ Risk‐ Idle assets

Weight Verification ExplainedHow can the Container be Weight Verified?Method 2, which requires weighing all the cargo and contents of the container and adding those weights to the container’s tare weight as indicated on the door end of the container.”

Weigh Each Component as it is loaded‐ Time Consuming‐ Labour Content High‐ Will not suit all applications‐ Room for Error

Incorporate weighing into existing value add processes.‐ Overhead if not already in place‐ Will not suit all applications or all containers‐ Long Term Planning to change processes if not

already in place – Time is not on our side

Current Industry Challenges (Complaints)

Industry Feedback

• Disruption to freight flow & delays• Cost $$$ to have container weight verified• Another Road Block Risk stopping the container travelling• Freight Delivered Late• Capital required • Time constraints for preparation• 6000 Containers Per day – Currently not enough Infrastructure

What if having a container weighed was as easy as catching an Uber?

There must be another alternative

• No need to move the container• On Demand• Price Competitive• Simple to book• Verified Weight Certificate the

Deliverable• No Overhead• No Capital• No Risk

This Solution is Conweigh

‐ Contractor (Service Provider)‐ Using the Conweigh Mobile Container Weighing Devices & Own Vehicle‐ Booked & Paid by Customer + Job Managed & Delivery through Cloud App (Uber Model)

• Container weight verification delivered on‐site as a mobile service with the deliverable a “verified weight certificate”

• Individual contractors to perform verification using Conweigh platform & weighing tools

• The Conweigh Cloud Platform• Customer Booking• Contractor Scheduling & Dispatch• Job conducted on App with Bluetooth communication

to weighing devices• Weight verification results & delivery, & billing • Contractor trained and certified by Conweigh

The Conweigh Service

Feedback

16/03/2016 153

As a shipper –1. From what you have heard today do you

believe you will be compliant to provide a verified weigh?

2. What methods do you currently use?

Feedback

16/03/2016 154

Are there any other weighing methods you would like to see included in AMSA list?

Feedback

16/03/2016 155

Do you have any concerns about being ready in time?

Feedback

16/03/2016 156

What would you like to see in the final Marine Order?

Further information sessions

CTAA, Freight & Trade Alliance (FTA) and the Australian Peak Shippers Association (APSA)

Feedback to AMSA Compliance Strategies including amendments to the 1-Stop Pre-

Receival Advice (PRA) Potential changes to operational and contractual relationships in the

landside transport chain to assist with compliance.

Perth, 26th April 2016

16/03/2016 157

cci’s department - fremantle seminar 16...amsa are the responsible authority 2. ... containers as...

Documents