THE DEFINITIVE TRUCKING SITE

July 2008

Maybe the major players involved in the transportation of Dangerous Goods (and others)  need to sit down, when they have a moment, pour a cup of coffee, sit on the stoep and ponder these thoughts put forward by our Dangerous Goods correspondent, Hentie Van  Jaarsveld. 

FW: In the middle of 2007, Fleetwatch ran an article covering the then state of the legislation governing the Transportation of Dangerous Goods and, in specifically, the problems experienced with sections governing the design and construction of the vehicles used. It is now a year later and there has been absolutely no response from NDOT regarding the matter. 

Despite a number of approaches, official and unofficial, by individuals and organisations, nothing has been done in order to correct the anomalous situation found in the present law. The same condition that has existed since early 2004 still exists and one cannot seem to move the relevant department in NDOT to action.

The question can therefore easily be asked "What do they keep themselves busy with every day?" How do they earn their SUV's and Armani suits? Because it is surely not by serving the interests of the Dangerous Goods transportation community. 

The industry has taken up the torch and has been at the forefront of developing standards and procedures to ensure transportation of dangerous goods in accordance with the latest international standards, often with local initiatives that surpass international requirements. 

The only evidence thus far, of any NDOT involvement, is that of an NDOT Dangerous Goods inspector, arriving at locations from where Dangerous Goods are being transported, and insisting on a number of requirements that are not contained in any form of the Dangerous Goods operating standard (SANS 10231-2006). Examples of these are that one should use some of the sample documents contained in SANS 10231 exactly as is, that the daily inspection requirements should exactly match the example in SANS 10231 and that one must have a copy of SANS 10231 on the premises.

Again, putting the cart before the horse. Instead of first making sure that the law is correctly written, spend your time on prosecuting. Not providing a service, but prosecuting. 

Please NDOT, the Dangerous Goods transportation fraternity is serious about safety and upholding superior operating standards. Please give us an opportunity to assist, but we also need you to be involved. 

HIGH STANDARDS The international oil companies operating in South Africa are setting exceedingly high standards for their own fleets and for the relevant contractor fleets to comply with. These photographs illustrate some of the standards adopted. Can other sectors please follow their example?

QUESTION TWO

Do industry and the public know about the huge effort being put in by the Dangerous Goods Road Transportation industry? 

FW: In the arena of Dangerous Goods Transportation by road, two sections of the industry can be cited as excellent examples of what can be done (despite NDOT's conspicuous absence) 

And by using these two examples, it is not meant to say that other sectors are not doing equally well or even better. 

The international Oil Companies operating in South Africa, are setting exceedingly high standards for their own fleets and for the relevant contractor fleets to comply with. If one operates under contract to one of these companies, you can be assured that you will be audited, checked, inspected and re-audited to make sure that you comply in all respects with the latest safety standards.

Some areas where operations are very closely controlled are:

• Driver training
  In-depth and regular training in all respects are required strictly monitored 

• Driver control 
  Driving hours and driver working hours are very strictly controlled and monitored. All vehicles are equipped with tracking systems and adherence to speed limits is also constantly checked. Violations result in sever disciplinary actions. 

• Maintenance 
  Maintenance systems and procedures are regularly audited. 

• Vehicle standards
  Vehicle standards are rigidly prescribed and a number of active and passive safety systems are employed. Great emphasis is put on vehicle visibility and pedestrian safety. Disc brakes and air suspension have become the norm. Some of these industry standard items have in turn found their way into our locally produced national tanker design standard.

• Vehicle inspections
  Vehicles are issued with annual Oil Company issued Safe Loading Passes (like a Roadworthy inspection for loading) and vehicles are also inspected by independent inspectors at each entry to a loading facility.
   
  Much of what we see above has resulted in substantial additional cost to the transporting operators and the Oil Companies. But the overall philosophy has been not to compromise safety. Some noted examples have yielded hugely positive results regarding vehicle roadworthiness and reduction in product handling incidents such as product spillages.
    
  SABITA (the Bitumen association) has now also embarked on a similar programme to institute an operating and vehicle standard for loading, transportation and off-loading. This will involve strict vehicle standards, daily inspections and Safe Loading Passes. This new Code of Practise is based on what the relevant laws and related SABS standards require with a number of additional requirements to ensure best practise.
   
  Again, cost will increase, and implementation heartache will result, but in the end, all will benefit. And for the general public, next time you see a road tanker, be mindful of the honest effort being put in by the industries.
   
  We laud these industries for their efforts!

Why is it so difficult for some transport operators to act responsibly?

FW: If we look at what the Dangerous Goods industry has achieved, one cannot but help to this with to what some other sectors are doing. And again, this is not intended to be a generalisation. 

On a recent trip on a Friday night, between Johannesburg and Colesberg, we were appalled by the behaviour of the heavy vehicle drivers. Of the vehicles encountered, at least 60% were driving at least 25% over the speed limit. Vehicles were also driving in convoys of four or five, with following distances such that one can barely fit a car into the gap. 

And this between midnight and 04h00 with, needless to say, no law enforcement officer on 600km of the N1! 

Do the owners of the transport companies involved have any idea what their drivers are up to? Surely it is not that difficult for them to instate effective driver behavioural controls and training. And yes, it does cost money, so maybe the SUV can only be replaced every three years and the game farm cannot be that big. But lost lives cost far more! 

And no, there were no road tankers amongst the vehicles mentioned above.