Absurd these danger load rules
Page 65
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Mr H. W. Mould (CM April 30) has, we fear, missed the point perhaps due to the very short report on our UKHIS paper and lecture. Those who attended the Teesside conference will know that we entirely share his view that labelling of hazardous loads by itself is of limited value unless equal attention is given to the construction of vehicles carrying such loads.
Indeed, one of our main criticisms is the absence of regulations covering the design and construction of hazardous waste vehicles. Hence our call for new legislation. It still remains the case, despite Mr Mould's assertions to the contrary, that hazardous loads need to be transported in nothing more substantial than a plastic bag—provided only that it carries the requisite labels. This is patently an absurd state of affairs.
Mr Mould cites the Corrosive Substances (Conveyance by Road) Regulation. But the primary requirement of this regulation requires simply that the vehicle be labelled and says nothing that concerns the standard of construction of the tank.
Our company and a very small number of others engaged in the carriage of wastes have already invested heavily in the design and manufacture of vehicles to meet, if not exceed, future possible legislation. Such action, taken voluntarily and sometimes to our commercial disadvantage, is we feel fully justified in the interests of public safety.
Mr Mould makes a plea for no further legislation and already finds the present inadequate legislation a burden. We must disagree, not because we want more legislation for its own sake, but because we believe imaginative safety legislation in this area to be essential.
G. A. MACKAY, Transport Controller.
D. R. DAVIES, Marketing Director, Red land Purle, Rayleigh, Essex.