Jim Newsome, director of the South Carolina Ports Authority, is arguing for weighing containers at terminals to meet new international safety rules, but the Port of Long Beach says using on-site scales for that purpose is too much of a challenge.
Ocean carriers should use industrial scales at ports to obtain weight information mandated under an updated international rule instead of relying on cargo owners to take and transmit the measurements, according to Jim Newsome, the chief executive officer of the South Carolina Ports Authority. Failing to use this “third” option could lead to significant supply chain disruption, he argues.
Many ports currently weigh outbound boxes and transmit the data to carriers as a best practice so carriers can create stow plans for safely balancing loads on a vessel. Using this practice would be the best option for complying with the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS) treaty deadline on July 1 for shippers to provide the certified container weight, Newsome said in an April 7 letter to the House Transportation and Infrastructure subcommittee on the Coast Guard and maritime transportation.
The subcommittee held a hearing a week later during which it heard complaints from agricultural shippers about the burden of the new requirements, which were developed by the International Maritime Organization in response to safety concerns about mis-declared weights.
“The use of these terminal provided scale-weights is part of a well-orchestrated process that not only allows for the use of very accurate weights, but addresses the time-sensitive nature of receiving cargo and loading ships. This is a fast-paced activity, which is today addressed in a productive way,” the former Hapag Lloyd shipping line executive wrote. “The further advantage is that one set of scales, consistently designed and calibrated, is used to discern all weights. Potential for inaccuracy is thus greatly reduced.”
The new SOLAS amendment allows shippers two methods for providing accurate weights: by weighing the entire laden container, or by totaling the weights of the contents and packing materials and adding it to the tare weight of the container itself. The weight is considered certified when someone at the company signs the shipping documents, which is intended to stop companies from making rough estimates.
Some shippers vigorously object to the second method because they don’t want to be responsible for documenting the weight of a box they don’t own and might be inaccurately printed on the side of a container, potentially leaving them liable for making false statements in the event of an accident. Ocean carriers have publicly stated that shippers are absolved from any inaccuracies related to the tare weight.
In the letter, Newsome said that random sampling of containers at the Port of Charleston showed that declared weights by shippers and weights measured by port scales routinely showed a difference of 10 percent or more.
“This is too large of a variance to be acceptable,” he said.
Measurements done by on-site scales are within 2 percent of being accurate, although they technically are not certified, Newsome added. The Port of Charleston weighs export boxes to ensure safe handling of boxes on terminals and meet U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration regulations.
Container lines should be allowed to use terminal-provided, drive-through scales to weigh cargo because it is safe and efficient, reduces the potential for discrepancies between terminal measurements and shipper-provided verified gross mass (VGM), and addresses the shortage of available third-party scales shippers can use ahead of port arrival, according to Newsome.
He said terminals that intend to turn away containers at the gate because they don’t have a verified gross mass on file “could further harm an already challenged container trucking industry and severely impact the efficiency with which container freight moves into and out of ports.”
Drayage drivers typically expect to make a double move by dropping an outbound load and picking up an inbound container of imports to take to a warehouse. If drivers are stuck with a rejected container, they may waste time returning it to the exporter or finding a weigh station, potentially cutting into the number of revenue-bearing trips they can make in a day, the port director argued.
Terminals at the Port of Long Beach use scales to generate estimated weights for exports, but none are “certified” as suitable to satisfy VGM requirements, port authority spokesman Art Wong said in an e-mail to American Shipper.
The scales are placed in arrival lanes at the cargo stations, but require truckers to come to complete stop to take a measurement. The scale captures the weight of the tractor, chassis, and the container. The terminal’s operating system subtracts an estimated weight for the tractor, including its fuel and driver, an estimated weight for the chassis, and an estimated weight for the generator-set and its fuel in the case of a refrigerated container.
“Terminals have declined to provide weighing services for two reasons: productivity impacts to traffic flow through their gate lanes; and the technical, mechanical, financial, and liability implications associated with certifying their scales and communicating the scale weights to relevant parties,” Wong said.
Terminal operators at the ports of Los Angeles, Oakland and Norfolk have also said they do not plan to weigh containers on behalf of shippers.
SCPA: Let ports provide VGM data
