Sea Container standard: update. Commission on Phytosanitary Measures - 7

Transcription

1 Sea Container standard: update Commission on Phytosanitary Measures - 7

2 group The steering group has been meeting by telephone and Adobe or Skype and correspondence through A meeting of an extended steering group was held in Rome in November A meeting of the full expert working group will take place in Malaysia May 28 June

3 group The group has made a series of recommendations. These have been fundamental points that affect the considerations of the EWG and form a base for the further work of the EWG.

4 group This presentation will look at: - Some basic recommendations - Background information - Further recommendations - A draft structure for the standard - The present programme Note: this is the present state of discussions. Nothing is cast in stone yet!

5 The group recognised that there are different kinds of containers, such as inland, domestic, sea, intermodal freight, shipping, boxes, offshore containers. The group considers that this standard should deal with sea containers only. The sea containers would be defined as: freight containers designed primarily to be moved by sea in international transport (with the exclusion of ferry transport and coastal movements).

6 It is recommended to amend the title and remove and conveyances Title suggested: Minimizing pest movement by sea containers in international trade.

7 The group identified three categories of sea container: - Empty containers ready to be packed - Empty containers for repositioning these are containers that are shipped empty to demand locations - Packed containers

8 Phasing in of a standard into industry practice This was discussed at length and it was decided d that the complexity of the issue required a phase-in approach and that the initial standard would address empty containers ready to be packed. Future parts of the standard would be for packed containers and empty containers being repositioned.

9 So the standard may eventually address 3 categories of container: -empty containers ready to be packed - empty containers for repositioning - packed containers.

10 Starting with empty containers ready to be packed is recommended because: Shipping companies are set up to deal more with cleaning and inspection of empty containers than with full ones and this would be an easier starting point for the industry as empty containers ready to be packed are already inspected at a depot. Also, all containers will get cleaned eventually as most of them go through the depot before getting packed.

11 group background information It is noted: Generally all containers are inspected, repaired, cleaned as required before release to shippers for packing, however this could be after having been through several countries. Empty containers for repositioning - In areas where the number of full import containers exceeds the demand for export containers, large numbers of empty containers are directed straight to ocean terminals after unpacking. These containers are not inspected or cleaned, they are shipped to demand locations where they are then inspected and cleaned before being released to shippers.

12 group background information Also: Currently inspections focus mainly on what needs to be repaired, not so much on cleanliness. The inspections are more geared towards finding and repairing damage ag to the containers and container safety. There is an obligation by shipping companies to remove all the packing material before giving the container to a new user. There are different inspection criteria are in place, all related to container structure and safety compliance, very little to do with cleanliness.

13 group background information The range of inspection criteria used by the industry includes:- IICL 5 and 3, CIC, UCIRC, RCIRC IICL International Institute of Container Lessors CIC Container Interchange Criteria UCIRC Unified Container Inspection & Repair Criteria However, there is no guidance to stop the movement of pests in loaded containers as shipping companies do not control the container packing.

14 It is suggested that: Recommendations be made to include IPPC requirements in existing Inspection and Repair Criteria and to involve all the players. It is crucial to include sensible suggestions from industry and get international organizations involved. It is agreed that by getting all players involved there are greater chances to manage to reduce risks.

15 The SG agreed that it would be preferable to involve the following organisations: - the International Maritime Organization, - the International ti Chamber of Shipping, i - the World Shipping Council - the Container Owners Association and - the International Organization for Standardization. It is noted that one of the members of the EWG is on the COA.

16 SG members recognised the importance of working with IMO for achieving results on where containers are packed. The overall concept must be transmitted in clear terminology to the IMO

17 General agreement was then reached on the idea to have the IPPC EWG develop material ilon cleaning containers for phytosanitary purposes that could be presented to IMO. The IPPC would also draft technical standards for NPPOs and consult with the IMO and other stakeholders, including CBD.

18 The SG noted the existence of many stakeholders, and the need to target all of them. It is agreed that Shipping companies should also have a prominent role, depots should ldbe included d( (a proposal emerged to target shipping lines and ask them to have their depots accredited), while terminals should be left for later consideration. The role of NPPOs needs to be defined in relation to the roles of port authorities i and shipping i companies. An outline of all roles could be considered for inclusion in the standard

19 Air containers The SG preferred not to include air containers in the Standard. They are a very different type of container with a different set of stakeholders and a different set of issues. When an air container standard is developed this standard may be useful for background material. Prioritizing containers high risk containers This issue was discussed and it was agreed that it is not possible to prioritize containers or particular trade routes as high or low risk. High risk locations and pathways will be different for each country. The standard should be applicable to all containers.

20 Non-plant pests This issue was discussed and it was agreed that the standard will focus on phytosanitary issues only, however biosecurity issues could be possibly be dealt with by cooperation with CBD/OIE and perhaps p addressed in a technical guidance document for the shipping companies.

21 Cleaning facilities accreditation of, auditing of.. This could be by the shipping line or by the NPPO. Accreditation is a way for NPPO to be satisfied that there is some control in the process and this builds confidence and trust. Accredited facilities can be monitored so there is a level of confidence fd in their product.

22 Verification of cleanliness -Custom information systems used by the WCO presents an opportunity to record container information - The group has contacted Customs agencies to explore this possibility.

23 The group discussed the provision of a technical guidance information to industry. The SG agreed that it should include - the provision that while cleaning inside of containers, depots should also look at the outside and remove pests if needed - an inspection procedure could also be developed. Guidance could be incorporated later as an appendix to the standard. The guidance can also have input from the CBD and OIE so that it encompasses all types of pests, not just plant pests.

24 Modifications df to the draft specification were recommended. These will be discussed by the Standards These will be discussed by the Standards Committee.

25 summary It is recommended that the standard contains general guidelines for the prevention ention of the spread of pests on containers and that specific guidance would then be developed for: empty containers released from storage facilities for packing with export goods empty containers for repositioning full containers for export preventing recontamination of containers accreditation verification of cleanliness

26 Sections for the draft standard dmight htinclude:

27 group draft contents t of standard d REQUIREMENTS 1. Pest-free containers 2. Accredited facilities for cleaning containers 3. Verification process 4. Electronic Documentation 5. Management of the container storage or packing areas SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS 6. Empty containers released from storage facilities for packing with export goods 7. Empty containers for repositioning 8. Full containers for export 9. Preventing recontamination of containers 10. Accreditation 11. Verification of cleanliness 12. Guidelines for importing countries 13. Cooperation

28 Proposed programme 1 Work with ILO drafting new guidelines IMO/ILO/UNECE Guidelines for pacing Cargo Transport Units COA has distributed a press release re association with IPPC ICS have been made aware of IPPC thrust for pest-free sea containers and distributed a press release - to propose amendments to container inspection criteria UCIRC Maersk to propose revised Cleaning Guidelines as industry guidelines

29 Proposed programme 2 WSC have distributed a press release re IPPC association IPPC CPM April present summary of developments COA Conference (July) possibly present case ICS Container Panel (??) possibly present case IPPC SC present summary of work of sea container EWG EWG meeting (May-June)- further development of draft standard