Carriage of Dangerous Goods

Today I received a package containing 6 x 500 ml containers of Spirit of Salts, that’s 3 litres total volume, spirit of salts being a dilution of Hydrochloric Acid. The package arrived wrapped in black plastic with only an address label on the outside, there were no warning labels as to the contents being an acid, the interior wrapping consisted of some bubble wrap over a cardboard box. The carrier was Parcelforce and the supplier was a company on EBay. I was under the impression that the carriage of dangerous substances required certain conditions to be complied with and that Royal Mail particularly would refuse anything that they classify as dangerous, batteries, liquids etc. As Parcelforce is I understand an offshoot of Royal Mail do they have similar requirements, I know that they refuse to carry the small replacement rechargeable lithium batteries that my wife’s Cochlear Implant uses, they come via DPD and all other spares that she needs come Royal Mail or Parcelforce. Dave W

Hi Dave, according to their prohibitions and restrictions acids are banned, Parcelforce (Help & Advice)

Regards Nick.

It is selfish of me, I know, but I do appreciate *the value implicit in the idea that I may be able to* 'send out' for fuels & other substances that might otherwise require one to purchase & collect them in person.

With the greatest of respect, may I offer the suggestion that publicising this issue on an open forum may well result in an adverse outcome?

Can't we sweep this discussion under the carpet?

Edited By DiogenesII on 07/12/2022 17:50:33

Hi Nick thanks for the reference I couldn’t find it, the reference is very clear it’s a definite No to the carriage of corrosives no matter how they are labelled and Spirit of Salts is definitely Hydrochloric Acid at greater than 25% concentration. I am amazed that Parcelforce actually delivered a package that is banned by their own regs but in their defence they probably rely on their customers to declare the contents of parcels truthfully. Highlights potential disasters waiting to occur. Dave W

I bought the very same thing several months ago on Ebay and that also was delivered by Parcelforce. No warnings at all on the package. To be honest I never gave it a second thought.

regards

Too late! Samsaranda has spilled the beans! Though there may not be any beans to spill.

'Spirits of Salts' is a hopeless old-fashioned generic name. The contents are dilute Hydrochloric Acid, but can be anything from an almost harmless domestic cleaning product to an industrial handle-with-care strong acid.

Only strong Hydrochloric Acid is worrying, and it's rendered safe by adding water. A spillage of dilute Hydrochloric Acid is unlikely to be a terrifying chemical accident.

Dave

Any worse than publicising it by clearly marking the contents on the package?

The definition of Spirit of Salts is greater than 25% Hydrochloric acid, I wouldn’t rate exposure to that as trivial, the fumes are strong enough to cause serious respiratory problems and can also corrode metals when in confined spaces, so something that I would show a great deal of respect to how I handle it. Perhaps SOD would like to dip his hands in it to show it’s not that dangerous! Dave W

Nick’s link takes us directly to ‘the rules of the game’ … and it seems abundantly clear that somewhere in the chain, those rules are being ignored.

MichaelG.

I don't get this thread. Dave W knows there are rules about posting hazardous substances. Nevertheless, he orders such product, and then is not happy that it is delivered . Cakeism? Merry Xmas

The point Dave is making is that the goods were sent with NO WARNING LABEL on the parcel indicating their contents.

I have received hazardous substances in the past and they had a Hazardous warning label indicating the contents. Some carriers will carry these goods for a increased cost. (Others won't)

Dave

That is a highly irresponsible attitude.
Shipping restrictions are there for a reason, for the safety of everyone. Leakage of acid can cause damage to other packages, injury to postal workers including blinding or at a worse case an aircraft crash. Even within the UK the Royal Mail use arcraft and more than one aircraft crash and many incidents have been caused by incorrectly shipped hazardous cargo.

john halfpenny
Dave W has every reason to expect that when he orders hazardous material that they will be properly packed, marked and sent by a suitable courier.

This nd similar incidents should be reported. For Royal Mail you can do it here

https://www.royalmail.com/report-a-crime

Robert.

Edited By Robert Atkinson 2 on 07/12/2022 22:27:19

Here's a variation on this theme:

If someone orders an electronic device which contains a lithium battery, it can be posted quite legally via Royal Mail or any courier service provided the battery is inside the device. But if you order a battery on its own, it cannot legally be sent by post or couriered.

This means buying a replacement battery for, say, a phone must be done in a shop.

Not realising this, I ordered a replacement battery via Amazon. It came via courier, in the usual Amazon way, and it carried a large warning label. It turns out Amazon have a special contract with the couriers.

Unfortunately, Amazon sent me the wrong battery. So I contacted them and they told me to send it back and they would sent the correct battery. They sent a Returns email which allowed me to print a large warning label for the return. I now know it is impossible to send a battery by post, and none of the courier services will touch it either. After exhaustive enquiries, I phoned Amazon. They knew of the problem and simply said 'Just dispose of it'. Fine; but when I tried to order another battery of the correct type they declined the sale.

You can buy them from eBay, via France, where they are advertised openly. How they can send it to you, I do not know, as I decided there are far too many fakes out there which don't have any significant capacity, so left it alone. I'm not fussed about a mobile phone most of the time, so I went back to my ancient £9 Nokia, whose battery still has life after umpty tumpty years. It' so old that the man in the local FONE shop just laughed when I asked for a replacement battery. How he gets his batteries is a mystery.

Marcus

Hi, I've never used spirit of salts, but I understand it's fairly powerful stuff. Back in 1966 we moved house, and the lavatory bowl in our new home had a thick unsightly brown stain covering the bottom and up a little above the water line, it was so bad that even strong bleach wouldn't shift it, so while all of us kids were at school one day, our dad got some spirit of salts from a local chemist and cleaned the bowl with it. When we came home and saw it we thought we had got a new bowl, as it was so bright and clean and not a trace of a brown stain in sight.

Regards Nick.

John Halfpenny, Robert summed up the situation accurately, I ordered an item that although hazardous can legitimately be sent by carriers with proper labelling and with carriers who are willing to carry such items and have systems to deal with them. In my case I had no knowledge which Carrier that the retailer was going to use, I assumed that he would be organising the carriage in a lawful manner with a carrier who had a system that catered for recognised hazardous materials, it transpired that did not happen. It appears that there are many cowboy outfits that are willing to put people at risk by not conforming to what legal constraints are in place for protection. Dave W

Perhaps SOD would like to dip his hands in it to show it’s not that dangerous! Dave W

10% hydrochloric acid is OK to dip your hands in - as long as they are rinsee off reasonably quickly, and you don’t have sensitive skin or cuts, etc. Not recommended as a general pastime, mind. 25%+ concentration would quite quickly cause redness, I would imagine. Only concentrated hydrochloric acid fumes.

thick unsightly brown stain covering the bottom and up a little above the water line, it was so bad that even strong bleach wouldn't shift it

Nick,

Bleach is an oxidising agent, so not designed to dissolve water hardness salts (with all sorts of inclusions). A strong acid will quickly dissolve calcium carbonate - and a load of other things, too!

Edited By not done it yet on 07/12/2022 22:57:17

 Double posted instead of editing!

Edited By not done it yet on 07/12/2022 22:56:58

Whilst certainly a breach of ParcelForce's conditions of carriage, this is not a meaningful breach of the ADR agreement as implemented by the Carriage of Dangerous Goods Regulations.

• In Table 3.2 of the 2021 ADR agreement, (available online on the UNECE website) there are two entries for Hydrochloric Acid (UN 1789) depending on the "packing group" a catagorisation which indicates the hazard posed and would be linked to concentration.
• For UN1789, PG II (the higher classification of hazard) column 3.4 indicates that the "limited quantity" is 1L (it's 5L for weaker Acid catagorised in PGIII).
• Under the limited quantity regulations, goods may be packaged in "inner packagings" of Plastics or Metal (or Glass/Stoneware where required for chemical compatiability with corrosive liquids) up to the volume specified in column 3.4 of table 3.2
• The inner packagings must then be securely packed into a secure "Outer Packaging" which protects the inner packagings from mechanical damage.
• So packaged, goods are effectively exempted from the requirements of the regulations, so long as the total quantity carried by any one transport unit is less than 8 tonnes, although each package or overpack should display the limited quantities diamond.

​

You could report this to the VCA and HSE as the shared competent authority, (i think this would fall into the HSE's jurisdiction as it relates to the consignment of goods and labeling, not to the vehicles or transport operations).

But I doubt that they would really care about what is effectively a missing diamond on an otherwise compliant package, and one which would be meaningless to almost everyone other than technical specialists in the field of DG transport anyway...

Certainly it wouldn't be worth it using their resources to take enforcement action.

​

All the major parcel operators including parcelforce are fully aware that customers routinely and flagrantly breach their conditions of carriage, with respect to liquids and dangerous goods.

Most larger parcel depots will collect several hundred kilogrammes each month of packages which have been identified as non-compliant, (often due to leaking) in dedicated bunded areas, which are subsequently sorted and identified for disposal/recycling by visiting chemists from a number of different specialist firms.

This has been the state of play for well over 15 years now, and it's well known to everyone involved, it's generally only when customers make really egregious breaches (such as sending dangerous goods which aren't packed in limited quantities, or which aren't eligible for that exemption, or cause a near miss where staff could have been harmed) that they will pursue fines or make a report to the competent authority, it simply wouldn't be practical any other way.

Hi Jelly,

That is all correct. However the OP's delivery failed on a least 3 points:

Over limited Qty (3l)
Not properly packaged
No hazaed markings

Also a lot of carriers, including Royal Mail, have more restrictivce hazardous materials policies.
Typically hazardous liquids would require a durable (metallic or strong plastic) container then a plastic bag, padding and then a strong outer container like a triwall box.

The rules on batteries are quite complex so a lot of carriers just refuse them outright rather than have the processes to deal with them.

Robert G8RPI.

Jelly, Thanks for your very comprehensive information regarding the subject, it certain answers my enquiry, many thanks. Dave W