Weight misdeclaration issue in the spotlight again

IN A battle against misdeclaration of container weights, Maersk Line has imposed penalty charges for frequent offenders It has again warned shippers of the dangers of tendering containers for shipment whose weights are markedly different from those advised when the original booking was made, or where actual weight wellexceeds that declared in the shipping instruction. From October 15, variations of more than 2 000-kilograms between the weight booked and the weight on the shipping instruction will attract an administrative penalty of US$50 per container. Where there is a variation of more than 1 000-kgs between the actual weight of the contents of a container and that given in the shipping instruction it will attract a penalty of US$1 000 per container. Although the number of infringements in recent months has been reduced to about 20 “weight issues” a day from a previous 80-100 frequency after Maersk launched a massive customer education programme on the overweight problem, weight misdeclarations continue to be a bugbear, according to national sales director, Mark Cairns. He told FTW that accurate information on the weights of units to be shipped was critical for preplanning the stowage of containers on board ship, which includes loading and discharge patterns. “Vessel’s stowage is done on the booked weights,” he said. This means that having actual weights shipped as close as possible to the estimated weights declared at the time cargo bookings are made is critical to ensure appropriate vessel stability and capacity planning. This has ramifications for safety, both for the vessel as well as for landside movements before and after discharge. In many countries substantial penalties are levied against carriers for landing or transporting cargo showing major weight discrepancies. The line’s findings are that things have improved, but some clients are still guilty of misdeclaration. “But we don’t believe it’s deliberate,” said Cairns, “rather a case of no processes or a lack of application of processes.” AndrewWeiss, operations manager of Mitsui OSK Line (MOL) agreed it was a problem – telling FTW that his line had also conducted a drive with major clients on the issue, and also had a similar penalty system in place. And it’s not necessarily just a discrepancy of a kilogram-or-two, he added. “Although we have informed our clients that the maximum gross weight for a container is 30-tonnes, we had one box last week which weighed 37-t – a whole 7 000-kgs above that declared limit.” Again, though, he felt it was more carelessness than a deliberate act. “But people who pack cotton into a box, and compress it to gain more tonnage, for example, often don’t realise that this causes a major fire risk, and therefore becomes a dangerous cargo.”