What happened? In the run-up to July 1, there was no shortage of doom-mongers predicting meltdown. We were invited to picture terminals choked with containers left languishing on the quay, either weighing more than they should, or simply lacking the correct documentation under the SOLAS amendments because the shippers didn’t even know about the new requirements.
But the reality seems more like the well-loved Monty Python sketch: Nothing Happened.
IMO’s SOLAS Convention now requires any container departing any port worldwide has a shipping document giving its verified gross mass (VGM), signed either electronically or in hard copy by the shipper. The amendment will, to quote the IMO, “assist in ensuring that the millions of containers carried on ships each year are optimally stowed, thereby helping to prevent container stacks collapsing and containers being lost overboard, and the associated injury and loss of life”.
“I haven’t heard of any terrible response or horror stories about hold-ups,” says Jonathan Williams, general manager of the Federation of National Associations of Shipbrokers and Agents (FONASBA). “I think we were fairly confident that to a large extent procedures were in place. So, it may well be that there are not any problems – but, having said that, we haven’t done a survey yet, so we don’t actually know.”
FONASBA is likely to carry out some form of survey in September, in advance of its annual meeting in London in October, he says. “And, of course, we will be talking about it at the annual meeting.” The IMO’s Sub-Committee on Carriage of Cargoes and Containers is due to meet in September, and that will be an opportunity for member states to comment on how VGM is proceeding, says a spokeswoman for the IMO.
There was, she points out, no period of grace, but a ‘pragmatic approach’. “The Maritime Safety Committee (MSC) agreed in May that while there should be no delay in the implementation of the SOLAS requirements, it would be beneficial if administrations and Port State Control authorities could take a ‘practical and pragmatic approach’ when enforcing them, for a period of three months immediately following July 1.”
This, she says, would help ensure that containers loaded before July 1 but transhipped on or after that date would reach their final destination without a VGM, and also provide flexibility to all stakeholders in containerised transport “to refine, if necessary, procedures, such as updated software, for documenting, communicating and sharing electronic VGM data”.
Y2K event
TT Club’s risk management director Peregrine Storrs-Fox says: “I think operationally, it has turned out in many ways to become a ‘Y2K’ event – most of the time it is working out fine and people have found ways around it. The industry actually is hugely resilient and has overcome all sorts of problems before, and this is just another of the new requirements they have to tackle.
“I am not aware of any ports that have become gridlocked or any particularly difficult operational issues. I am sure there have been teething issues but by and large things have kept moving pretty much in the normal way.”
There are some parts of the world quite openly saying they can’t do this, whether it’s the competent authority or the shippers who are not able to get their act together, and that will carry on for a time, he says. “But these are smaller trading areas – the main trading areas are saying yes, we are doing this.”
However, he says: “The cynic in me is saying, what exactly are you doing? What I am seeing is people are definitely making the effort to get something into the box that says VGM – the question is, what are they putting in there and is it correct or correct enough? Only time will tell, either through some sort of monitoring process or else through another MSC Napoli. That said, I certainly don’t want to see another accident – and thankfully these are few and far between.”
There have been some complaints and debates over who pays for what, with the Global Shippers’ Forum, for example, claiming that some service providers are exploiting the new rules and imposing exorbitant charges for administration and other services.
Mr Storrs-Fox says: “There are things that will come out of the woodwork as to how this is done and who accepts the costs for it. Any regulatory change incurs cost which has to be covered somewhere.”
Packing issues
He sees the VGM requirement as a very small part of an incremental increase in safety for the containerised supply chain, with the most fundamental being the 2014 Code of Practice for Packing of Cargo Transport Units (CTU) Code. This sets out how things should be packed in any type of transport unit and its contents need to be disseminated effectively, he says.
“The CTU Code addresses a much more thorny issue than weight – it’s the behavioural and cultural side of the industry,” he says. “The fact remains that the barriers for people coming into the supply chain are incredibly low at the moment. Someone with no or little awareness of how to pack cargo safely can enter the business and start doing it without requiring any level of competence in most jurisdictions. While knowledge and accuracy around weight does help, there is no doubt in my mind that the way cargo is placed in a container and packed and secured is a much bigger issue than weight per se.
“The principles of the CTU Code need to be brought into national/international legislation and we need to have some sort of accreditation that would show competence in relation to packing.”
Martin Halford, managing director of Dynamic Load Monitoring (DLM), agrees: “You can be told that a container weighs X but if all the weight is at one end of the container, and if you have ten containers loaded that way, how does that affect the ship loading?”
DLM teamed up with AMBA Dockside to launch a new twistlock load cell and container monitoring system in advance of the VGM regulations. The system measures the centre of gravity as well as overall weight, says Mr Halford. “Although there is not a requirement for measuring centre of gravity now, we can see that in the future people will need it – so it is future-proofing our system.”
A family-run business, DLM designs and manufactures weighing equipment typically used in offshore, lifting, rigging and other marine applications – “we saw an opportunity in the SOLAS regulations”, says Mr Halford. The company has supplied the new system to shippers and terminals. “There was a big panic running up to July 1 and we sold a lot of systems. We have supplied to customers across Europe, including Belgium and Cyprus.”
One point to note, he says, is about accuracy. “The offshore industry requires surveys and certification of equipment and has strict calibration and inspection requirements. There is a need for some guidelines to ensure that containers are being accurately weighed.”
EFFECTIVENESS OF REGULATION ‘REMAINS TO BE SEEN’
DP World met with customers well before July 1 to determine the role of each of its ports in each country, says spokesman Michael Vertigans.
“There are three main aspects as to how we are helping them comply with SOLAS regulations. First, implemention of EDI technology to read and pass VGM information to all points in the supply chain with terminal operation system (TOS) updates; second, modification of our procedures to guarantee that any container without a VGM is not loaded; and third, implementation of weighing solutions certified by local authorities to provide a VGM if required.”
He points out that to date fewer than 50% of the IMO country members have implemented guidelines or regulations to provide clarity to all involved and affected.
“Certification of weighing equipment, regulation and accreditation of shippers to provide VGM using Method 2 [weighing all constituents parts in the load, including container], and countries where SOLAS has not been implemented yet are issues that all in the industry face,” says Mr Vertigans.
“It was never the intention of SOLAS to inhibit the efficiency of the supply chain; it is a move made on safety grounds to try and help stop vessels capsizing. Issues such as unanimous tolerance, control mechanisms to determinate deviations in declared weights, and implementation of penalties for wrong VGM declarations need to be addressed. How effective the implementation and controls will be remains to be seen.”
