Transport of Radioactive Goods
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Transport of Radioactive Goods
Not quite sure if this is the best forum in which to ask this, but it does relate to a current problem in Oz (mods please move if appropriate)...
Reading the following in the SMH this morning regarding the problems for hospitals caused by the shutdown of the newly installed Lucas Heights reactor, I am interested to know from those involved how a decision is made as to whether radioactive materials are refused carriage or offloaded:
"The chief of operations at Lucas Heights, Ron Cameron, said that while the radioactive products were still being imported, shipments were being delayed, on average, every 2.4 weeks. Each delay affected up to 1500 patients.
He said that when pilots became concerned about the mix of potentially hazardous cargo on board their aircraft, the nuclear material was often among the first to be offloaded.
"There have been treatments postponed," Dr Cameron said, adding that a committee of doctors and Lucas Heights specialists was "prioritising" patients."
I quite understand a pilot's right to offload pax at their discretion, but how does it work with a correctly documented, correctly packaged cargo item? With my current understanding I am left to assume that individual pilots make an on the spot risk assessment regarding quantities/combinations of dangerous goods, but on what is this based? The added risks of contamination in the event of a crash? The risk of an accident severe enough to breach the required containment is extremely low. Concerns about exposure? The packaging is designed to reduce exposure rates below internationally agreed safe levels. Any other reasons?
I know from working at the pointy end of this issue in another related area that it can cause considerable logistical problems for hospital staff and angst for patients when their imaging or treatment is delayed.
Link to full article here:
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/...467388895.html
Thanks
Reading the following in the SMH this morning regarding the problems for hospitals caused by the shutdown of the newly installed Lucas Heights reactor, I am interested to know from those involved how a decision is made as to whether radioactive materials are refused carriage or offloaded:
"The chief of operations at Lucas Heights, Ron Cameron, said that while the radioactive products were still being imported, shipments were being delayed, on average, every 2.4 weeks. Each delay affected up to 1500 patients.
He said that when pilots became concerned about the mix of potentially hazardous cargo on board their aircraft, the nuclear material was often among the first to be offloaded.
"There have been treatments postponed," Dr Cameron said, adding that a committee of doctors and Lucas Heights specialists was "prioritising" patients."
I quite understand a pilot's right to offload pax at their discretion, but how does it work with a correctly documented, correctly packaged cargo item? With my current understanding I am left to assume that individual pilots make an on the spot risk assessment regarding quantities/combinations of dangerous goods, but on what is this based? The added risks of contamination in the event of a crash? The risk of an accident severe enough to breach the required containment is extremely low. Concerns about exposure? The packaging is designed to reduce exposure rates below internationally agreed safe levels. Any other reasons?
I know from working at the pointy end of this issue in another related area that it can cause considerable logistical problems for hospital staff and angst for patients when their imaging or treatment is delayed.
Link to full article here:
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/...467388895.html
Thanks
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Sydney
Posts: 817
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It can also depend on what other cargo is being carried, and the proximity to radioactive materials. There is a cargo segregation chart available on the IATA website.
The PIC will be given a NOTOC on every flight, which will tell him/her exactly what dg's, if any, are loaded, and whereabouts they are loaded. Generally, if a PIC has any questions, then they will query the load controller.... and normally accept what they are being told.
If the PIC has any doubts, they can order the removal of DG's from the aircraft. It is rare for this to happen from my experience.
Dangerous goods, when transported correctly are quite safe.
The PIC will be given a NOTOC on every flight, which will tell him/her exactly what dg's, if any, are loaded, and whereabouts they are loaded. Generally, if a PIC has any questions, then they will query the load controller.... and normally accept what they are being told.
If the PIC has any doubts, they can order the removal of DG's from the aircraft. It is rare for this to happen from my experience.
Dangerous goods, when transported correctly are quite safe.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Hiding between the Animal Bar and the Suave Bar
Posts: 409
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I quite understand a pilot's right to offload pax at their discretion, but how does it work with a correctly documented, correctly packaged cargo item?
Civil Aviation Regulations 1988
224 Pilot in command <in part ...>
(2) A pilot in command of an aircraft is responsible for:
(a) the start, continuation, diversion and end of a flight by the aircraft; and
(b) the operation and safety of the aircraft during flight time; and
(c) the safety of persons and cargo carried on the aircraft; and
(d) the conduct and safety of members of the crew on the aircraft.
<snip>
(3) The pilot in command shall have final authority as to the disposition of the aircraft while he or she is in command and for the maintenance of discipline by all persons on board.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK - I understand what you are both saying, and I'm aware that the PIC has ultimate authority in order to ensure safety. What I am trying to reconcile is this: what I know, (and what apache says) which is that when transported correctly, these goods are quite safe, versus the quote from the article implying that a shipment is offloaded every 2.4 weeks. Doesn't sound like a particularly rare occurence, and yet it is likely that the packages that are being regularly offloaded were no less correctly packaged and documented than any other.
From the point-of-view of those on the (lack of) receiving end, it can seem like a an arbitrary decision has been made which has no basis in any kind of scientific risk assessment. Please tell me this isn't so....
From the point-of-view of those on the (lack of) receiving end, it can seem like a an arbitrary decision has been made which has no basis in any kind of scientific risk assessment. Please tell me this isn't so....
Metrosexual
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Enroute
Posts: 622
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Generally, if a pilot is offloading from a freighter for example, it could be a simple matter of their weight, that items are offloaded.
If there are Transport Index unit considerations (ie they are cumulative per consignment) then then a certain amount of the radioactive items will get offloaded. Maybe with an increase in the volume and frequency of Radioactive shipments, this might be the case.
In my experience it's pretty rare that DG's are offloaded arbitrarily because the pilot is spooked. If they meet the proper requirements, including cumulative T.I's, proper packaging and segregation procedures are followed - they usually ship.
Having asid all of that, if the freight company has to 'offload' freight due to weight/bulking out etc, they're the ones who make the decision. There may be higher priority items to go (and a commercial priority like a major client like a bank for example, might get their freight on, instead of the isotopes or whatever).
There are plenty of other commercial variables, including how much the medical people are paying to get their freight shipped etc. They might need to pay a premium on their shipments to get the priority etc etc
I'd be curious to see actual figures, not guess work on the part of the journalist or interviewee.
If there are Transport Index unit considerations (ie they are cumulative per consignment) then then a certain amount of the radioactive items will get offloaded. Maybe with an increase in the volume and frequency of Radioactive shipments, this might be the case.
In my experience it's pretty rare that DG's are offloaded arbitrarily because the pilot is spooked. If they meet the proper requirements, including cumulative T.I's, proper packaging and segregation procedures are followed - they usually ship.
Having asid all of that, if the freight company has to 'offload' freight due to weight/bulking out etc, they're the ones who make the decision. There may be higher priority items to go (and a commercial priority like a major client like a bank for example, might get their freight on, instead of the isotopes or whatever).
There are plenty of other commercial variables, including how much the medical people are paying to get their freight shipped etc. They might need to pay a premium on their shipments to get the priority etc etc
I'd be curious to see actual figures, not guess work on the part of the journalist or interviewee.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Hiding between the Animal Bar and the Suave Bar
Posts: 409
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jet's post puts it pretty well.
I'd want to see more information than just what's in the article.
We thoroughly understand your desire to get the goods to their destination. Many pilots also have friends or relatives who need these materials.
However, to meet our many obligations as pilot in command we are doing several balancing acts involving a myriad of factors, only some of which relate to your particular freight. Total weight, weight loading per square metre, volume, mix of freight types, limits on the total amount of a type of freight, .... Just because something is "a correctly documented, correctly packaged cargo item", that doesn't mean it's appropriate for carriage on any particular flight.
At the end of the day, it has to be the pilot's decision as to what they will or won't carry. The day someone tells me I *have* to carry a piece of freight that I reasonably believe is inappropriate, I'll just walk quietly away from the aircraft. Either it's offloaded or someone else can fly the aircraft. I'd rather be unemployed.
I'd want to see more information than just what's in the article.
We thoroughly understand your desire to get the goods to their destination. Many pilots also have friends or relatives who need these materials.
However, to meet our many obligations as pilot in command we are doing several balancing acts involving a myriad of factors, only some of which relate to your particular freight. Total weight, weight loading per square metre, volume, mix of freight types, limits on the total amount of a type of freight, .... Just because something is "a correctly documented, correctly packaged cargo item", that doesn't mean it's appropriate for carriage on any particular flight.
At the end of the day, it has to be the pilot's decision as to what they will or won't carry. The day someone tells me I *have* to carry a piece of freight that I reasonably believe is inappropriate, I'll just walk quietly away from the aircraft. Either it's offloaded or someone else can fly the aircraft. I'd rather be unemployed.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 725
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by mphysflier
He said that when pilots became concerned about the mix of potentially hazardous cargo on board their aircraft, the nuclear material was often among the first to be offloaded.
Why not "the dog ate my homework?"
Originally Posted by Jet A Knight
In my experience it's pretty rare that DG's are offloaded arbitrarily because the pilot is spooked. If they meet the proper requirements, including cumulative T.I's, proper packaging and segregation procedures are followed - they usually ship.
If I have a signed declaration from a trained and accredited specialist working in a disciplined environment saying that the load is SAFE, then on what basis do I refuse to carry it? That would draw a sharp enquiry from the chief pilot asking who the hell made me more expert than the freight forwarder.
The problem lies elsewhere.
Last edited by ITCZ; 23rd Feb 2008 at 08:51.
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Devonport Tasmania Australia
Posts: 1,837
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Capn
As I understand it, acceptance of any DG's including radioactives requires full currency in Dangerous Goods certification, not just awareness certificate. This is required for the person accepting the freight, the person issuing the air waybill and the person signing the load and trim certificate. Such goods should also be clearly listed on the load and trim - all copies.
We used to carry radioactive Mercury out of Wynyard on a regular basis from the pulp mill's baby reactor (that not many people knew about) and could because of seperation rules uplift it in the rear locker of the TN F27s. From there to Nuovo Pignone in FLR it was CAO - normally F27 freighter to SYD - Flying Tigers to TYO and then JAL freighter transpolar to LON and finally AZ to ROM followed by road to FLR.
All was done by the book, but the bit that beats me is the WNY (then-now BWT) MEL leg as a flight attendant was sitting in very close proximity to the load on takeoff and landing, and both were working the rear galley in the cruise getting even closer.
The regs checked out, but the CAO regs for the rest of the aeroplane types did not seem to ring true, as the seperation would have been much greater even in the bulk hold of a widebody.
Maybe refusal is a wise thing, as the law may indeed be an ass.
Best all
EWL
As I understand it, acceptance of any DG's including radioactives requires full currency in Dangerous Goods certification, not just awareness certificate. This is required for the person accepting the freight, the person issuing the air waybill and the person signing the load and trim certificate. Such goods should also be clearly listed on the load and trim - all copies.
We used to carry radioactive Mercury out of Wynyard on a regular basis from the pulp mill's baby reactor (that not many people knew about) and could because of seperation rules uplift it in the rear locker of the TN F27s. From there to Nuovo Pignone in FLR it was CAO - normally F27 freighter to SYD - Flying Tigers to TYO and then JAL freighter transpolar to LON and finally AZ to ROM followed by road to FLR.
All was done by the book, but the bit that beats me is the WNY (then-now BWT) MEL leg as a flight attendant was sitting in very close proximity to the load on takeoff and landing, and both were working the rear galley in the cruise getting even closer.
The regs checked out, but the CAO regs for the rest of the aeroplane types did not seem to ring true, as the seperation would have been much greater even in the bulk hold of a widebody.
Maybe refusal is a wise thing, as the law may indeed be an ass.
Best all
EWL
Some of this stuff is very time sensitive, ie only usable within a short period of time so any delay could render it unusable.
I've carried enough radioactives while on freighters, generally no problems at all if all the packing and shipping regulations are followed. Gets interesting if you have a spillage, need a physicist to certify the clean up.
Generally only very small quantities carried by air due to strict total limits, you will not see 44gal drums, and no shipment which requires monitoring can go by air.
Try a dangerous goods acceptance course if you are really interested, takes about three days and will bore you to tears.
I've carried enough radioactives while on freighters, generally no problems at all if all the packing and shipping regulations are followed. Gets interesting if you have a spillage, need a physicist to certify the clean up.
Generally only very small quantities carried by air due to strict total limits, you will not see 44gal drums, and no shipment which requires monitoring can go by air.
Try a dangerous goods acceptance course if you are really interested, takes about three days and will bore you to tears.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: N/A
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ladies and Gents,
Reading the thread, I've got a strong feeling that there is insufficient information to single out cargo air transport as the point of concern surrounding the delay problem.
Currently I'm crewing one of the cargo airlines operating internationally into and out of Australia. The carriage of medical radioactives occurs regularly, but they're not being offloaded at request of the crews.
I think the complete transport chain needs to examined here, from producer to end-user. The only comment I'd make on the transport industry in all its forms is that "priority" shipment and delivery is secured by payment of a "premium". This situation gives rise to a "commercial priority" for every consignment carried within the industry that may not reflect the priority of the end-user. High yield freight travels before low yield freight.
Decisions as to whether a particular consignment makes it into the proposed load in the first place are initiated from the highly "commercial" individuals within the industries staff; ie, sales staff, load controllers, etc.
Dragonfly
Reading the thread, I've got a strong feeling that there is insufficient information to single out cargo air transport as the point of concern surrounding the delay problem.
Currently I'm crewing one of the cargo airlines operating internationally into and out of Australia. The carriage of medical radioactives occurs regularly, but they're not being offloaded at request of the crews.
I think the complete transport chain needs to examined here, from producer to end-user. The only comment I'd make on the transport industry in all its forms is that "priority" shipment and delivery is secured by payment of a "premium". This situation gives rise to a "commercial priority" for every consignment carried within the industry that may not reflect the priority of the end-user. High yield freight travels before low yield freight.
Decisions as to whether a particular consignment makes it into the proposed load in the first place are initiated from the highly "commercial" individuals within the industries staff; ie, sales staff, load controllers, etc.
Dragonfly
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank you for your swift and informative replies - the impression I am gaining is that the majority of problems may be caused by harsh economic factors rather than arbitrary refusals by flight crew.
ITCZ - Don't necessarily blame the ANSTO guy - I know from first-hand experience that this is what the suppliers are telling us, the customers. Is this what the freight company is telling our suppliers too? Perhaps it's an easy excuse, rather than "Sorry, we bumped your time-sensitive medical supplies because MegaMine Corp who pay us lots more money than you do wanted some heavy engineering equipment loaded at the last minute".
ITCZ - Don't necessarily blame the ANSTO guy - I know from first-hand experience that this is what the suppliers are telling us, the customers. Is this what the freight company is telling our suppliers too? Perhaps it's an easy excuse, rather than "Sorry, we bumped your time-sensitive medical supplies because MegaMine Corp who pay us lots more money than you do wanted some heavy engineering equipment loaded at the last minute".
Transport of DG's
Mphysflier,
I currently manage an International Cargo Terminal based at Melbourne Airport. As indicated in the previous thread, the training of my staff is at a much greater level than that of the flight crew. The Dangerous Goods Acceptance course goes for three days (initial training), then staff are required to renew their qualifications every two years.
Cargo tendered for carriage on any of the domestic / international carriers will be accompanied with a Notoc. The Notoc will provide all of the usual information, piece, weight, description, packing group etc. It will also provide the PIC with the appropriate emergency response codes. Whilst it is extremely rare that DG's will be offloaded, it does happen. But I must stress that DG's are not offloaded due to economic considerations. From first hand experience, the revenue yield on DG's is considerable greater that general cargo. Domestically DG's will normally be charged out at "overnight" rates with priority only given to Mail & AOG parts. Internationally the rate is referred to as TACT which is essentially the highest rate that can be charged for any specific sector.
Also be aware that companies such as mine have strict audit programs in place and we work with our customers and suppliers to ensure that DG's are not delayed.
The final variation to the carriage of DG's rests with the carriers themselves. Korean Airlines for example will only uplift Class 9 DG's on their Pax flights.
If I can be of any further assistance, PM me.
By the way, I'm also the holder of a CPL and part time meat bomber. If you are shipping you DG's in GA, I would suggest that most GA operators do not have qualified acceptance staff to handle DG shipments, and as such the PIC's should be very careful. Pay particular attention to the tradesmen's toolbox.....
Cheers
Omega471
I currently manage an International Cargo Terminal based at Melbourne Airport. As indicated in the previous thread, the training of my staff is at a much greater level than that of the flight crew. The Dangerous Goods Acceptance course goes for three days (initial training), then staff are required to renew their qualifications every two years.
Cargo tendered for carriage on any of the domestic / international carriers will be accompanied with a Notoc. The Notoc will provide all of the usual information, piece, weight, description, packing group etc. It will also provide the PIC with the appropriate emergency response codes. Whilst it is extremely rare that DG's will be offloaded, it does happen. But I must stress that DG's are not offloaded due to economic considerations. From first hand experience, the revenue yield on DG's is considerable greater that general cargo. Domestically DG's will normally be charged out at "overnight" rates with priority only given to Mail & AOG parts. Internationally the rate is referred to as TACT which is essentially the highest rate that can be charged for any specific sector.
Also be aware that companies such as mine have strict audit programs in place and we work with our customers and suppliers to ensure that DG's are not delayed.
The final variation to the carriage of DG's rests with the carriers themselves. Korean Airlines for example will only uplift Class 9 DG's on their Pax flights.
If I can be of any further assistance, PM me.
By the way, I'm also the holder of a CPL and part time meat bomber. If you are shipping you DG's in GA, I would suggest that most GA operators do not have qualified acceptance staff to handle DG shipments, and as such the PIC's should be very careful. Pay particular attention to the tradesmen's toolbox.....
Cheers
Omega471
I regularly bring radioactive iodine (I125) in from the UK. (Now that's got you wondering hasn't it!). It has a half-life of 60 days and everthing must connect properly for it to be of use on arrival. If it doesn't arrive on time the supplier doesn't get paid.
I very much doubt that medical radioisotopes are being off loaded at the say-so of pilots, but its an easy blame when someone screws up and a connection is missed!
Dr
I very much doubt that medical radioisotopes are being off loaded at the say-so of pilots, but its an easy blame when someone screws up and a connection is missed!
Dr
Last edited by ForkTailedDrKiller; 25th Feb 2008 at 10:36.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Hell...where angels ride harleys
Posts: 239
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have in the past offloaded DG's because the paperwork is not correct! now I may be more qualified than the average pilot, as I used to consign DG's and have done about 6 acceptance courses and used to teach junior staff, but there is NO WAY KNOWN that I will lose MY licence, and my livelihood because some clerk stuffs up!!!!
generally, I have not had a problem, and as long as it looks kosher, then there will NOT be a problem on my little plane
very very rarely have I heard about crew offloading DG's because they can!
I got called once to see the captain of an A/C about some DG's that I had loaded. He had concerns, sop I raced down and saw him, with my IATA book, and the A/C loading manual. He explained his concern, I showed him where I got my info and said that if HE wanted it off, then that was fine with me!..... the DG's travelled.
GENERALLY, pilots WILL ask, if they have concerns over the cargo!!!!! before offloading it
generally, I have not had a problem, and as long as it looks kosher, then there will NOT be a problem on my little plane
very very rarely have I heard about crew offloading DG's because they can!
I got called once to see the captain of an A/C about some DG's that I had loaded. He had concerns, sop I raced down and saw him, with my IATA book, and the A/C loading manual. He explained his concern, I showed him where I got my info and said that if HE wanted it off, then that was fine with me!..... the DG's travelled.
GENERALLY, pilots WILL ask, if they have concerns over the cargo!!!!! before offloading it
Sorry, Im a little thick right now, but just to confirm, the flight crew do not need an acceptance course, so long as whoever accepts and loads the cargo has done it?
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 725
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Arrr, aha -
Lookup CAR 1988 262Q, 262T, 262TA, 262V. Flight crew must do a DG awareness training course every 2 years. Shippers and acceptors of DG do a more stringent Acceptance course.
What sort of a scientist goes to the media to highlight an important public health issue without investigating the TRUE reason for the offloads?
Is this man a physicist, or just a management wonk working on his MBA by coursework?
Lookup CAR 1988 262Q, 262T, 262TA, 262V. Flight crew must do a DG awareness training course every 2 years. Shippers and acceptors of DG do a more stringent Acceptance course.
ITCZ - Don't necessarily blame the ANSTO guy - I know from first-hand experience that this is what the suppliers are telling us, the customers.
Is this man a physicist, or just a management wonk working on his MBA by coursework?
Last edited by ITCZ; 26th Feb 2008 at 03:05.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Manchester
Age: 45
Posts: 615
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DG is generally the highest rate of yield, sometimes 1.5 X TACT rate, so yield isn't a problem.
The only issues I could imagine are cumulative TIs being too high or maybe AVI are also in an adjacent compartment which can also complicate things (as can unexposed film as well).
For a skipper to override the DG and loading manuals they'd have to have a bloody good reason.
Also in my experience, medical sources are quite often so low in activity that they travel as class 9 rather than class 7.
The only issues I could imagine are cumulative TIs being too high or maybe AVI are also in an adjacent compartment which can also complicate things (as can unexposed film as well).
For a skipper to override the DG and loading manuals they'd have to have a bloody good reason.
Also in my experience, medical sources are quite often so low in activity that they travel as class 9 rather than class 7.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Alright - so 'economic' factors are a low probability too (Cheers Omega471). Perhaps it does sometimes come down to a cumulative TI or weight problem, maybe occasionally a paperwork problem, but it seems the originally quoted excuse is some kind of furphy.
I'm reassured to learn that there is plentiful DG training for those involved, and that questions would probably be asked if a PIC refused carriage 'for no good reason'. I'm also impressed with the great high quality response to this (my first PPruNe threadstarting) question - Thanks!
Oh, and ForkTailedDrKiller, I guess you have your finger in a number of pies, so to speak.....
Regards
mphysflier
I'm reassured to learn that there is plentiful DG training for those involved, and that questions would probably be asked if a PIC refused carriage 'for no good reason'. I'm also impressed with the great high quality response to this (my first PPruNe threadstarting) question - Thanks!
Oh, and ForkTailedDrKiller, I guess you have your finger in a number of pies, so to speak.....
Regards
mphysflier