damage prevention and loading services - aar.com 2013 dpls newsletter_final.pdf · the flexitank...

If you’re reading this before mid-June and have yet to register for the 2013 Damage Prevention & Freight Claim Conference, you still have time to join in what looks to be one of our best attended conferences. More than 300 business representatives from the railroad, shipper, receiver, and supplier industries will be participating in the conference at the San Antonio Marriott Rivercenter.

The theme for this year’s conference is Beyond the Basics – Understanding the “Why.” DP&FC Committee Chairman Tony Palfini, UP will preside. Lance Fritz, Exec. VP Operations, UP will provide the keynote address and Mike Rock, VP External Affairs, UP will provide a political update on current and pending legislative action and the potential effect on railroads and their customers.

Conference topics will provide an analytical overview of the rail environment and a detailed review on the evolution and outlook for rail equipment. Additional

general session topics are new products and innovations, Q&A sessions with industry experts, success stories, and focused sessions on current intermodal, open top, and boxcar topics.

New for this year's conference will be a specialized program track on motor vehicle transportation topics, including future rail equipment, chock securement, vehicle design trends, technological improvements, customer service issues, and the annual awards for the highest scoring automotive loading and unloading rail facilities.

The conference will include an exhibit and trade show on the latest products and services related to quality rail transportation. In addition, a welcome reception at the Sunset Station complex near the Marriott Rivercenter is planned for Monday evening, June 17.

So don’t delay, come on down to San Antonio – home of the Alamo and the famed River Walk – for this exciting educational event.

Damage Prevention and Loading Services

Transportation Technology Center, Inc. , a subsidiary of Associat ion of American Railroads

2013 DP & FC Conference in San Antonio, Texas, June 17-19

May 2013

Register online at http://www.regonline.com/DPFC2013

Publications TAG Update

The Closed Car Loading Publications Technical Advisory Group (TAG) has been convening via conference calls to work on the revision of 16 commodity specific closed car loading pamphlets. To date, five have been reviewed and updated and are in line for formatting by TTCI’s publications group. An additional five have been revised and are in the review process by the TAG.

The Closed Car Loading Standards have been reorganized by commodity into 10 parts. Part 1, Minimum Loading Standards for Freight in General Purpose Boxcars, replaces Pamphlet No. 14 and becomes the compendium for all things related to freight securement in boxcars. The TAG anticipates having all 10 parts finalized and approved by the end of summer 2013 – just in time for school!

Part Subject / Title Status Next Step

1 Minimum Loading Standards for Freight in General Purpose Boxcars

Draft completed. TTCI formatting

2 Best Practices for Loading of Roll Paper in Railcars

QLT TAG responsibility.

3 Minimum Loading Standards for Plywood and Similar Building Products in Closed Cars

Completed industry review. TTCI formatting

4 Minimum Loading Standards for Lumber in Closed Cars

Completed industry review. TTCI formatting

5 Minimum Loading Standards for Building Brick in Closed Cars

Draft nearing completion. TAG review

6 Minimum Loading Standards for Prepared Food and Similarly Packaged Products in Closed Cars

Draft sent to DPFC. Comments incorporated; formatted by TTCI.

TAG final review

7 Minimum Loading Standards for Intermediate Bulk Containers in Closed Cars


8 Minimum Loading Standards for Bagged and Baled Commodities in Closed Cars


9 Minimum Loading Standards for Coiled Metal Products in Closed Cars

TAG reviewed; comments incorporated.

TTCI formatting

10 Minimum Loading Standards for Primary Metal Products in Closed Cars


The Publications TAG has agreed to make recommendation to the Damage Prevention & Freight Claim Committee to archive the following six commodity loading pamphlets due to obsolescence:

Pamphlet No. 1 Freight Forwarder (2/80) Pamphlet No. 4 Barrels, Drums or Kegs (11/65), Includes Special Supplement (6/74) Pamphlet No. 15 Furniture (7/79) Pamphlet No. 21 Machinery (5/95) Pamphlet No. 25 Flat Paper Stock (5/93) Pamphlet No. 29 Household Appliances (10/79)

Technical Advisory Group Updates May 2013

Damage Prevention Newsletter

Example Loading Diagram for Part 6, Prepared Food and Similarly Packaged Products

Flexitank TAG

The Flexitank TAG has compiled a set of Minimum Acceptance Criteria for Flexitanks. The purpose of this document is to provide guidance to manufacturers, distributors, and users of flexible bulk liquid bladders (flexitanks) intended for North American rail intermodal distribution. Flexitanks, regardless of their contents, are restricted by rule, circular, or tariff by all Class I North American railroads. Only nonhazardous commodities may be considered for transport in bulk liquid bladders. The criteria will be finalized when research is completed on the influence of fluid surge.

The most common mode of failure of flexitanks during impact testing is tank rupture resulting from fluid surging back and forth after an impact. One question being addressed by ongoing research is, “What is the effect of buff and draft train action on fluid surge inside flexitanks?” As a most railfans know, when a train moves on the track, each car is able to move backwards and forwards, within the limits of its draft gears or cushioning. If liquid confined in a flexitank is sloshing back and forth at the same relative frequency, the system would be described as “in phase,” and the amplitude of the surge could be amplified and possibly damage or cause failure of the flexitank. Recent testing on the Vibration Test Unit would seem to confirm this hypothesis. Testing simulating 39 feet of jointed track produced severe fluid response within the tank. The figure below is an acceleration time history recorded from a flexitank during simulation, which shows sustained movement over the entire input period.

Additional research is expected to be conducted during midsummer.

Damage and Prevention Newsletter

Acceleration Time History Recorded from a Flexitank during Simulation Testing

On a related front, the Container Owners Association (COA) has contracted with the British Standards Institute (BSI) to develop a Publicly Available Specification (PAS) for Flexitanks to address standards for the manufacture and testing of flexitanks. A PAS is the first step in the process of developing an International Standard. The Steering Group, organized by BSI and COA, have established a goal of October 2013 for publication of the PAS.

Quality Lead Team for Prevention of Damage to Paper

The Quality Lead Team (QLT) reconvened December 2012 with the mission: to develop suitable loading and securement methods for roll paper in 60-ft boxcars having 16-ft wide double plug doors; to ensure safe, effective, transport of paper products, damage free through the North American rail network.

The QLT consists of seven representatives of AAR member roads complimented with seven representatives of the paper industry.

At its first meeting, the QLT defined a priority list to begin work on developing loading methods for 60-ft cars. The top seven priorities are as follows:

Priority Diameter Test

Hierarchy Paper Type Load Plan Test Type

1a. 58 in. 1 or 2 23 lb medium/liner Rubber mats with fillers Field

1b. 58 in. 1 or 2 23 lb medium/liner Rubber mats with air bags

Field

2. 50 in. 1 Coated/ book/ newsprint Per GIS 668 Field

3. 40 in. 1 Coated/ book/ newsprint 2-1-2 pattern with air bags; 53 spots

Impact/field

4a. 45 in. 4 Coated/ book/ newsprint

2-1-2 pattern with doorway per GIS 668 (unitizing instead of “X” straps)

Field

4b. 45 in. 4 Coated/ book/ newsprint 2-1-2 pattern with doorway per GIS 668 w/o straps

Impact/VTU/field

5. 60 in. 3 Board Rubber mats with fillers Field


This priority schedule was approved by the Damage Prevention & Freight Claim Committee and test shipments began early in 2013 on Priority 1. To date, 25 field shipment test loads have been conducted to address Priority 1a. Test shipments for Priorities 2 and 3 are slated to commence this summer.

The figure below illustrates Priority 4a. using the 2-1-2 loading pattern with doorway per GIS No. 668 for 45-inch diameter coated/ book/ newsprint paper rolls.

Priority 4a. – 2-1-2 Loading Pattern for 45-inch Diameter Paper Rolls

The QLT also agreed to form a Best Practices TAG to revise the current Best Practices for Loading Roll Paper in Railcars.


SPRING 2013 TEST SUMMARY (Since last reported Fall 2012)

Impact Tests (FI)

FI 22-12: Proprietary.

FI 23-12: Flexitank Disposable Bulk Packaging System for NonHazardous Liquid in a 20’ ISO Container – COFC – Shanghai Yunjet Plastic Packaging Co., Ltd. An impact test was conducted to evaluate the performance of a disposable bulk packaging system for shipment of nonhazardous liquid in 20’ containers. The Yunjet flexitank system has a maximum capacity of 6,340 US gallons (24,000 liters) and consists of four layers of polyethylene plus an outer layer of woven polypropylene. The flexitank was fitted into a standard 20’ container and secured with a 6-piece bulkhead system inserted into the vertical corner post lashing slots directly inside the doors. The Yunjet flexitank system performed as intended with no leaks and no container damage, meeting both AAR and COA impact test requirements.

FI 24-12: 50” Diameter Rolls of Newsprint Loaded in a 1-1 Offset Pattern on Rubber Mat in TOFC – Complete Packaging Systems / Regupol America. Three impact tests were conducted to evaluate Regupol America’s Load Secure™ 6910 rebonded granulate rubber mat in a trailer loads of 50” diameter newsprint. The first consisted of twenty rolls in a 1-1 offset pattern and secured with 20” wide mats according to Method E-20 of the AAR Intermodal Loading Guide. This method failed to complete impact testing.

The second load consisted of 18 rolls in a 1-1 offset pattern and secured with 20” wide mats according to a modified Method E-20. This load successfully completed impact testing.

The third load consisted of 16 rolls loaded in 2 sections in a 1-1 offset pattern and secured with 30” wide mats. This load also successfully completed impact testing.

FI 25-12: Flexitank Disposable Bulk Packaging System for NonHazardous Liquid in a 20’ ISO Container – COFC – Fluid Cargo Pvt. Ltd. An impact test was conducted to evaluate the performance of a disposable bulk packaging system for shipment of nonhazardous liquid in 20’ containers. The Fluid Cargo Pvt. Ltd.’s flexitank system has a

maximum capacity of 6,340 US gallons (24,000 liters) and consists of four layers of low density polyethylene plus an out layer of woven polypropylene. The flexitank is fitted into a standard 20’ container and secured with a steel bulkhead system inserted into the vertical corner post lashing slots directly inside the doors. The Fluid Cargo Pvt. Ltd. flexitank system successfully completed the test and performed as intended.

FI 01-13: Flexitank Disposable Bulk Packaging System for NonHazardous Liquid in a 20’ ISO Container – COFC – Qingdao Hengxin Plastic Co., Ltd. An impact test was conducted to evaluate the performance of a disposable bulk packaging system for shipment of nonhazardous liquid in 20’ containers. The Qingdao Hengxin flexitank system has a maximum capacity of 6,340 US gallons (24,000 liters) and consists of four layers of polyethylene plus an outer layer of woven polypropylene. The flexitank was fitted into a standard 20’ container and secured with a 3-piece bulkhead system inserted into the vertical corner post lashing slots directly inside the doors. Six steel tubes (three per side wall), 3.0 mm thick were placed equidistance vertically along the side walls and two tubes vertically at the end wall to help minimize the deformation of the container. The Qingdao Hengxin flexitank system performed as intended.

FI 02-13: Flexitank Disposable Bulk Packaging System for NonHazardous Liquid in a 20’ ISO Container – COFC – Bulkpacking Flexitank Co., Ltd. An impact test was conducted to evaluate the performance of a disposable bulk packaging system for shipment of nonhazardous liquid in 20’ containers. The Bulkpacking Flexitank Co., Ltd.’s flexitank system has a maximum capacity of 6,340 US gallons (24,000 liters) and consists of two layers of low density polyethylene plus an out layer of woven polypropylene. The flexitank is fitted into a standard 20’ container and secured with a steel bulkhead system inserted into the vertical corner post lashing slots directly inside the doors. The Bulkpacking Flexitank Co., Ltd flexitank system did not successfully complete the test nor performed as intended.

FI 03-13: COA Impact Test of a Flexitank Disposable Bulk Packaging System for NonHazardous Liquid in a 20’ ISO Container – COFC – CAC S.A. Flexitank Co., Ltd. A COA impact test was conducted to evaluate the performance of a disposable bulk packaging system for shipment of nonhazardous liquid in 20’ containers. The CAC S.A. flexitank met current COA impact test requirements.


FI 04-13: Three Loads of 48” to 50” Diameter Roll Printing Paper Loaded in a 1-1 Offset Pattern on Rubber Mats in COFC- UPM. Three impact tests were conducted to evaluate the performance of rubber mats and unitizing straps to secure split sections of roll printing paper for COFC service. The first load consisting of 8 - 63” wide rolls successfully completed impact testing.

The second load of 7 - 72” wide rolls successfully completed impact testing, but the load was observed to be leaning on the flatcar.

The third load of 6 - 94” wide rolls successfully completed impact testing but caused damage to both the paper rolls and the front end wall of the container.

FI 05-13: Flexitank Disposable Bulk Packaging System for NonHazardous Liquid in a 53’ Domestic Trailer –TOFC– LemcoStar LLC. An impact test was conducted to evaluate the performance of a disposable bulk packaging system for shipment of nonhazardous liquid in 53’ domestic trailers. The LemcoStar flexitank system has a capacity of 2,000 US gallons per bladder, with usually 2 bladders per trailer. For this test only one bladder was tested. The LemcoStar flexitank system failed to successfully complete impact testing due to leakage.

FI 06-13: Flexitank Disposable Bulk Packaging System for NonHazardous Liquid in a 53’ Domestic Trailer – TOFC– Environmental Packaging Technologies. An impact test was conducted to evaluate the performance of a disposable bulk packaging system for shipment of nonhazardous liquid in 53’ domestic trailers. The EPT flexitank system has a maximum capacity of 2,100 US gallons per bladder, with 3 bladders per trailer. The EPT flexitank system successfully completed impact testing with no movement or leakage.

FI 07-13: Flexitank Disposable Bulk Packaging System for NonHazardous Liquid in a 40’ ISO Container – COFC – Environmental Packaging Technologies. An impact test was conducted to evaluate the performance of a disposable bulk packaging system for shipment of nonhazardous liquid in 40’ ISO Containers. The EPT flexitank system has a maximum capacity of 2,100 US gallons per bladder, with 3 bladders per container. The EPT flexitank system successfully completed impact testing with very little movement and no leakage. FI 08-13: Flexitank Disposable Bulk Packaging System for NonHazardous Liquid in a 20’ ISO Container – COFC – Qingdao LET Flexitank Co., Ltd. An impact test was conducted to evaluate the performance of a disposable bulk packaging system for shipment of nonhazardous liquid in 20’ ISO containers. The Qingdao LET flexitank system has a maximum capacity of 6,160 US gallons (23,000 liters) and consists of four layers of polyethylene plus an outer layer of woven polypropylene. The flexitank was fitted into a standard 20’ container and secured with a five piece bulkhead system inserted into the vertical corner post lashing slots directly inside the doors. Six steel tubes (three per side wall), 2.7 mm thick were placed equidistance vertically along the side walls and two tubes horizontally at the end wall to help minimize the deformation of the container. The flexitank system did not complete the test due to seam failure resulting in tank leakage.


Laboratory Tests (LB)

LB 35-12: 0.6250” x 0.035” (AAR-65) Type IV Polyester Plastic (PET) with Heat Sealed Type Joints US Strapping. All of the required nonmetallic samples submitted met the requirements set forth in current ASTM D3950 Standard Specification for Strapping, Nonmetallic (and Joining Methods) and AAR Open Top Loading Rules, Section1, Rule 19.

LB 36-12: Level 1 Polyethylene Pneumatic Dunnage Bags, OEMSERV Hong Kong Ltd. Three of the ten samples submitted failed to meet the Leak Test requirements set forth in General Information Bulletin No. 9 (Product Performance Profile for Pneumatic Dunnage).

LB 37-12: Level 1 Polyethylene Pneumatic Dunnage Bags, Stopak. All 10 samples passed Part A Leak Test; the first two samples tested for Part B Burst test passed and the last two samples tested failed at 5.5 psig. Testing was stopped.

LB 38-12: 0.750” x 0.040” (AAR-63) Type IV Polyester Plastic (PET) with Friction Weld Type Joints, Maillis Strapping Systems-USA, Inc. All of the required nonmetallic samples submitted met the requirements set forth in current ASTM D3950 Standard Specification for Strapping, Nonmetallic (and Joining Methods) and AAR Open Top Loading Rules, Section1, Rule 19.

LB 39-12: Level 1 Polyethylene/ Polypropylene/ Paper Pneumatic Dunnage Bags, Tianjin Zerpo Supply Co. Ltd. All ten samples met the requirements set forth in General Information Bulletin No. 9, Product Performance Profile for Pneumatic Dunnage.

LB 40-12: Level 1 Polyethylene Pneumatic Dunnage Bags, Amerigreen Worldwide LLC. The first five samples inflated for the leak test failed to maintain the required air pressure. On all five samples the air was leaking from the inflation valve; testing was stopped.

LB 41-12: Proprietary.

LB 42-12: Level 3 Polyethylene/ Polypropylene/ Paper Pneumatic Dunnage Bags, ITW Shippers. All of the ten samples met the requirements set forth in General Information Bulletin No. 9, Product Performance Profile for Pneumatic Dunnage.

LB 43-12: 1.25” x 0.029” (AAR-63) steel securement bands and joints, Maillis Strapping Systems-USA, Inc. All of the required steel samples submitted met the requirements set forth in current ASTM D3953 Standard Specification for Strapping, Flat Steel and Seals and AAR Open Top Loading Rules, Section1, Rule 17.

LB 01-13: Level 1 Polyethylene Pneumatic Dunnage Bags, Stopak. All of the ten samples met the requirements set forth in General Information Bulletin No. 9, Product Performance Profile for Pneumatic Dunnage.

LB 02-13: Level 1 Polyethylene/ Polypropylene/ Paper Pneumatic Dunnage Bags, Stopak. All of the ten samples met the requirements set forth in General Information Bulletin No. 9, Product Performance Profile for Pneumatic Dunnage.

LB 03-13: 3/4” x 0.020” (AAR-63) Type I Heavy-Duty Steel Package Band and Joints with 1 seal; 2 pairs of notches 5/8” x 0.020” (AAR-63) Type I Heavy-Duty Steel Securement Bands and Joints with 1 seal; 2 pairs of notches per seal 1 ¼” x 0.029” (AAR-63 Type I Heavy-Duty Steel Securement Bands and Joints with 2 seal; 2 pairs of notches per seal, Garibaldi S.A. All of the required steel samples submitted met the requirements set forth in current ASTM D3953 Standard Specification for Strapping, Flat Steel and Seals and AAR Open Top Loading Rules, Section1, Rule 17.

LB 04-13: Level 2 Polyethylene Pneumatic Dunnage Bags, Air Sack de Mexico. Four of the ten samples submitted for testing leaked off after one day during Part A Leak Test; testing was stopped.

LB 05-13: 1” x 0.050 embossed Type IV Polyester Plastic (PET) with Heat Type Seals 1 ¼” x 0.050 plain Type IV Polyester Plastic (PET) with Heat Type Seals 1 ¼” x 0.040 plain Type IV Polyester Plastic (PET) with Heat Type Seals 1 ¼” x 0.040 embossed Type IV Polyester Plastic (PET) with Heat Type Seals


1 ¼” x 0.050 embossed Type IV Polyester Plastic (PET) with Heat Type Seals 5/8” x 0.035 embossed Type IV Polyester Plastic (PET) with Heat Type Seals, FROMM Chile S.A. All samples submitted met the requirements set forth in current ASTM D3950 Standard Specification for Strapping, Nonmetallic (and Joining Methods) and AAR Open Top Loading Rules, Section1, Rule 19.

LB 06-13: 0.6250” x 0.035” (AAR-65) Type IV Polyester Plastic (PET) with Heat Sealed Type Joints 0.6250” x 0.040” (AAR-65) Type IV Polyester Plastic (PET) with Heat Sealed Type Joints 0.75” x 0.050” (AAR-65) Type IV Polyester Plastic (PET) with Heat Sealed Type Joints, U.S. Strapping Co. All of the nonmetallic samples submitted met the requirements set forth in current ASTM D3950 Standard Specification for Strapping, Nonmetallic (and Joining Methods) and AAR Open Top Loading Rules, Section1, Rule 19.


LB 08-13: Level 4 Polyethylene Pneumatic Dunnage Bags, Stopak. All of the ten samples met the requirements set forth in General Information Bulletin No. 9, Product Performance Profile for Pneumatic Dunnage.



LB 11-13: Level 2 Polyethylene/ Polypropylene/ Paper Pneumatic Dunnage Bags, Stopak. All of the ten samples met the requirements set forth in General Information Bulletin No. 9, Product Performance Profile for Pneumatic Dunnage.


LB 13-13: Level 4 Polyethylene/ Polypropylene/ Paper Pneumatic Dunnage Bags, ITW Shippers. All of the ten samples met the requirements set forth in General Information Bulletin No. 9, Product Performance Profile for Pneumatic Dunnage.

LB 14-13: 0.985” x 0.050” (AAR-65) Type IV Polyester Plastic (PET) with Friction Sealed Type Joints, U.S. Strapping Co. All of the nonmetallic samples submitted met the requirements set forth in current ASTM D3950 Standard Specification for Strapping, Nonmetallic (and Joining Methods) and AAR Open Top Loading Rules, Section1, Rule 19.

LB 15-13: 5/8” x 0.020” High Tensile Steel with Crimp Type Seal, Hankum Co., Ltd. All of the required samples submitted met the requirements set forth in current ASTM D3953 Standard Specification for Strapping, Flat Steel and Seals and AAR Open Top Loading Rules, Section1, Rule 17.

LB 16-13: 0.625” x 0.040” (AAR-65) Type IV Polyester Plastic (PET) with Friction Sealed Type Joints

0.625” x 0.035” (AAR-65) Type IV Polyester Plastic (PET) with Friction Sealed Type Joints, JSC Polivektris. All of the nonmetallic samples submitted met the requirements set forth in current ASTM D3950 Standard Specification for Strapping, Nonmetallic (and Joining Methods) and AAR Open Top Loading Rules, Section1, Rule 19.

LB 17-13: 0.625” x 0.035” (AAR-65) Type IV Polyester Plastic (PET) with Friction Sealed Type Joints, TEUFELBERGER Ges.M.b.H. All of the nonmetallic samples submitted met the requirements set forth in current ASTM D3950 Standard Specification for Strapping, Nonmetallic (and Joining Methods) and AAR Open Top Loading Rules, Section1, Rule 19.

LB 18-13: 0.625” x 0.040” (AAR-65) Type IV Polyester Plastic (PET) with Friction Sealed Type Joints

0.625” x 0.035” (AAR-65) Type IV Polyester Plastic (PET) with Friction Sealed Type Joints, DY Strap Co. All of the nonmetallic samples submitted met the requirements set forth in current ASTM D3950 Standard Specification for Strapping, Nonmetallic (and Joining Methods) and AAR Open Top Loading Rules, Section1, Rule 19.


The Open Top Loading Rules Committee has had a very busy 1st quarter this year. The 2013 revisions to all seven of Open Top Loading Manuals are progressing, Section 1 General Rules has been released, and the rest are soon to follow.

Several impact tests of various commodities have been performed: structural steel, coils on flatracks, and pipe in gondolas. The current focus is on loading methods of pipe in gondolas (Section 2 Figure 124) and of structural steel loads (Section 2 Figure 100 series). Figure 124 is still being addressed, because shippers are continually looking for alternatives to this loading method. The offset pattern below the top cord of the gondola is proving to be a very successful concept (Fig. 124A).

Section 2 Figure 124 A — Pipe in Gondolas Loading Method

Shippers are testing variations to this method that involves nesting and layered concepts.

Structural steel loading methods are proving to be very daunting, because shippers are meeting customers’ demands for specific requests of various lengths and sizes; these loads are being called “grocery loads.”

Section 2 Figure 100 Series — Structural Steel Loads—Grocery Loads


Open Top Loading Rules Committee Update By Mike Sandoval, Manager AAR Loading Rules

As this photo shows, structural steel loading is a very complex issue for the Open Top Loading Rules Committee. Testing concepts include offsetting of the lower layers (similar to Section 2 Figure 124A), along with the use of metallic and nonmetallic securement strapping.

The new website is up and running, and it lists all of the Open Top Loading Rules Circulars that have been issued since the last revision. Shippers and OTLR users have had very positive comments on the new website design, which is easier to navigate.

http://www.ttci.aar.com/standards/open_top_loading_shippers.php

Screenshot of OTLR Web Page


In the last few months we have received many requests for a list of and training material for currently approved and conditionally approved vehicle chock securement systems. The following photos show these grate track and third rail locking track chock systems and where to obtain training materials for them.

Vehicle Chock Securement SystemsBy Pat Breslin, Manager Data & Field Services


In addition, the following legacy chocks have been covered extensively in training:

Grate Chocks — IEC Holden Chock, IEC Holden Block Chock (Supplemental), Zeftek AVR Chock (Supplemental)

Third Rail Locking Track Chocks — Thrall Steel and plastic chocks and approved equivalent chocks, SCT Co-polymer 2nd or 3rd generation chocks and approved equivalent chocks.

Please contact me if you have any questions regarding any of these securement systems.


On January 1, 2013, key changes were put into effect in the Origin and Destination Quality Review programs. These changes focused on areas that could potentially cause damage to motor vehicles and worker safety. Two questions that have affected both Quality Review programs have occurred in the Preloading and Baying Procedures sections, which score relatively higher than other sections of the Quality Review.

Safe driving habits and observing all posted traffic regulations are the first notable changes to the baying area. Safe driving habits include not speeding through the yard, not cutting across bays, and ensuring the shuttle van drivers do not start until all personnel are seated. In addition, are personnel following the directional arrows of the yard, stopping at stop signs, and yielding at intersections with yield signs? All vehicles that are being driven in the yard are subjected to this question. This includes customer vehicles, shuttle vans, and golf carts. This question is scored based on the number of observations in compliance divided by the total number of observations as a percentage.

Baying personnel clothing condition involves everyone that is working in the baying area, including vehicle inspectors. Not only is the clothing condition being checked for exposed zippers, snaps, or any other type of metal, but also checking the condition of gloves and tools being used in the baying area. Scanning devices must not have any exposed metal on them, nor can they be set down on the vehicle while it is being inspected, regardless if it is wrapped in protective material. In addition, gloves are checked for cleanliness. Scoring of this question is based on the number of personnel in compliance divided by the total number of personnel observed as a percentage.


Quality Review Changes — Baying Procedures By David Hendrixon

By unanimous vote, the Damage Prevention & Freight Claim Committee elected the following individuals to serve for the 2013-2014 term:

Gary Johnson, Director LEADS-Merchandise/Intermodal, CSX - DP&FC Committee Chair

Dave Hopkins, Director LARS-Southern Corridor, BNSF – DP&FC Committee Vice Chair

Current DP&FC Chair Tony Palfini, UP will pass the gavel to Gary Johnson at the close of the 2013 Annual Conference in San Antonio, TX.

Congratulations Gary and Dave!

The ratio of loss and damage (L&D) as a percent of freight revenue decreased from 0.14 percent in 2011 to 0.13 percent in 2012 – tying an all-time low mark set in 2010. Ten years ago in 2003, the ratio was 0.31 percent.

The 2012 L&D payout for the seven major U.S. and Canadian reporting railroads was $100.3 million, down 3 percent from $103.2 million in 2011. The largest drop in payment cause categories was Train Accidents, which decreased 15 percent from $54.7 million to $46.3 million. One of the largest commodity decreases was in Pulp, Paper, and Allied Products, which went from $8.6 million in L&D in 2011 to $6.2 million in 2012.

The following chart shows the steady decline in the ratio of L&D to revenue over the last 10 years.


New Officers Elected

2012 L&D Ratio Ties All-Time Record Low

Damage Prevention & Loading Services Contacts 55500 DOT Road Pueblo, CO 81001

Recent DP&LS Publications Available at www.aarpublications.com

Gary Held, Director Damage Prevention & Loading Services Phone 919-651-5027 [email protected]

Tom Feltault, Senior Manager Damage Prevention Engineering Phone 719-585-1817 [email protected]

Mike Sandoval, Manager AAR Loading Rules Phone 719-584-0605 [email protected]

Travis Wolgram, Senior Engineer Damage Prevention Phone 719-584-7187 [email protected]

Ray Fries, Manager Field Operations Phone 919-622-4488 [email protected]

Pat Breslin, Manager Data and Field Services Phone 240-401-0642 [email protected]

David Hendrixon, Damage Prevention Specialist Phone 719-252-3439 [email protected]

General Information Series No. 732, 50 in. Diameter Roll Paper on End Using Rubber Mats (Intermodal Loading Guide Methods E-5 & E-20). Cancels G.I.S. Nos.729 & 731.

General Information Series No. 733, 47 in. to 50 in. Diameter Roll Paper on End Using Rubber Mats

(New Intermodal Loading Guide Method E-21).

General Information Series No. 734, Reusable Polyethylene Void Fillers and Disposable Inflatable Dunnage for Securing Bright Stack Cans or Similar Palletized Products in Cushioned Boxcars.

The single copy price for each G.I.S. is $6.00 for members and $12.00 for nonmembers.

DP&LS The address for the DP&LS group is:

Damage Prevention and Loading Services Transportation Technology Center, Inc. P.O. Box 11130 55500 DOT Road Pueblo, CO 81001

All phone numbers for all DP&LS staff are listed. Note that some email addresses for DP&LS individuals have changed.

http://www.ttci.aar.com

“Accelerating the use of clean, safe and efficient technologies by railways

worldwide.”

Gary Held

Tom Feltault

Mike Sandoval

Travis Wolgram

Ray Fries

Pat Breslin

DavidHendrixon


damage prevention and loading services - aar.com 2013 dpls newsletter_final.pdf · the flexitank...

Documents