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.”