Low Anthony, Hüsing Ulf-Peter, Preisser Alexandra, Baur Xaver
Hamburg Port Health Center, Institute of Occupational Health, Seewartenstrasse 10. D-20459 Hamburg, Germany.
Int Marit Health. 2003;54(1-4):77-85.
According to IMO's international regulations, e.g. "Recommendations on the safe use of pesticides in ships", fumigated containers and ship cargoes must be labeled giving specifications about dates of fumigation and the fumigation gas used. Furthermore, appropriate certificates are necessary and these records have to be forwarded to the Port Health Authorities without their explicitly asking for them.
According to IMO (DSC/Circ.8.24.7.2001) a recent inspection of containers unloaded in ports showed that some were under fumigation, but not declared as such and in a few cases these ventilated containers arrive with "Degas Certificates" stating that fumigant has been removed, but still have a high fumigant concentration inside when opened. There are similar reports from The Netherlands, where 21% of the fumigated containers had missing or false declarations and contained measurable amounts of toxic gas. In England 6% were mentioned to be allegedly false. Reports exist of a number of other incidents with containers under fumigation arriving in English ports with no accompanying documents on the ship or at the port of discharge as to the type of cargo. In one case several people were hospitalized after exposure to phosphine gas because the fumigant tablets were not yet totally decomposed before the ship arrived at its destination port. In Bavaria, Germany, a bad accident recently occurred through a non declared fumigated container (see press release). Our sample: a large container ship in the Port of Hamburg where 27 of the cargo's containers were found fumigated with 27 non/incomplete/false declarations. These examples show that missing/false labelling is frequent.
Clearance of in-transit fumigated containers in ports is complicated and time-consuming for the captain and shipping company. The above mentioned accident and also the results of our spot check prove, as do the experiences in The Netherlands and England, that false declarations of fumigated containers seem commonplace. This coincides with a considerable danger for ship crews, port workers and end users. More stringent controls, including gas analysis, are necessary as well as a systematic study. As a first step in that direction, we included the question "Are fumigated containers on board?", in the form of the Maritime Declaration of Health we demand. A computer controlled information and communication system network between ports and its link with the Waterways and Shipping Directorate would enable comprehensive plausibility monitoring and thus help achieve a better surveillance.
根据国际海事组织(IMO)的国际法规,例如“船舶安全使用农药建议”,经过熏蒸处理的集装箱和船载货物必须进行标识,注明熏蒸日期及所使用的熏蒸气体规格。此外,还需要相应的证书,并且这些记录必须在港口卫生当局未明确要求的情况下转发给他们。
根据IMO(DSC/Circ.8.24.7.2001),近期对在港口卸载的集装箱进行的检查表明,一些集装箱正在熏蒸处理,但未进行相应申报,并且在少数情况下,这些通风的集装箱在抵达时持有“除气证书”,声明熏蒸剂已去除,但打开时内部仍有高浓度的熏蒸剂。荷兰也有类似报告,其中21%的熏蒸集装箱存在申报缺失或虚假的情况,且含有可测量的有毒气体量。在英国,据称有6%的情况存在虚假申报。有报告称,其他一些装有熏蒸货物的集装箱抵达英国港口时,船上或卸货港没有关于货物类型的任何随附文件。在一个案例中,数人因接触磷化氢气体而住院,原因是在船舶抵达目的港之前熏蒸片剂尚未完全分解。在德国巴伐利亚州,最近发生了一起因未申报的熏蒸集装箱导致的严重事故(见新闻稿)。我们的样本:汉堡港的一艘大型集装箱船,其货物中的27个集装箱被发现进行了熏蒸处理,但有27份申报不完整或虚假。这些例子表明,缺失/虚假标识的情况很常见。
对于船长和航运公司而言,在港口对运输途中经过熏蒸处理的集装箱进行清关既复杂又耗时。上述事故以及我们的抽查结果,与荷兰和英国的经验一样,证明熏蒸集装箱的虚假申报似乎很普遍。这对船员、港口工人和最终用户构成了相当大的危险。需要更严格的控制措施,包括气体分析,以及进行系统研究。作为朝着这个方向迈出的第一步,我们在要求填写的《航海健康申报书》中加入了“船上是否有经过熏蒸处理的集装箱?”这一问题。港口之间由计算机控制的信息和通信系统网络及其与水道和航运局的链接,将能够进行全面的合理性监测,从而有助于实现更好的监管。