|
UPDATE
February 14, 2007 - TSA Changes Again After 9/11/2001, the new Transportation Safety
Administration (TSA) effectively banned CO2 cylinders from passing
through their security checkpoints. This policy was amended in
March 2006 mimicking the FAA's long tested policy. However, once
again the TSA has banned the cylinders in a major sweep of their
regulations after the arrests in England that led to the temporary ban
on liquids and gels.
CO2 cylinders are currently banned from all security
checkpoints in U.S. airports as of November 2, 2006.
An effort is underway currently to request that the TSA
reverse their decision once again. Additionally, the request asked
for a more permanent solution. The TSA has advised that not only
will this go through the administrative process within TSA, but the
final decision to the request will most likely end in the White
House. The TSA has advised that this process may be completed in
June 2007.
Do not take your CO2 cylinder(s) to the airports.
WHAT ALTERNATE METHODS OF SHIPPING YOUR CO2
CYLINDERS
DO YOU HAVE?
-
Preferred - Ship your CO2 cylinders via an air package company to your sailing
destination. They normally accept these devices, though you
must declare them as a Hazardous Material/Dangerous Good. Then
when done sailing, return your CO2 cylinders via the air package
company to your home.
-
Leave your CO2 cylinders at home, check ahead that local
chandleries at your sailing destination carry your type of CO2
cartridge, buy replacements at your sailing destination, then
dispose of them before returning home, then re-install your original
CO2 cylinders at home.
-
If you attempt to carry the CO2 cylinders with you on a commercial
aircraft, either as carry on, or checked baggage, without declaring
the hazardous material, be prepared to face federal charges.
LET US KNOW YOUR EXPERIENCE
If you have comments or experiences with this matter, please send them
to us (we share these stories with the U.S. Coast Guard to promote their
involvement in asking the USDOT to change their Regulations):
HOW CAN A PERMANENT SOLUTION BE MADE TO THIS
PROBLEM?
Pretend for one moment that the
wording in the USDOT (domestic) Regulations and the IATA
(international) Regulations strengthens the wording that makes it
permissible for airlines to accept these devices on board.
The outcome is that the individual
airlines will always have the final decision to accept or deny
hazardous materials on board their planes. Why? Think
of the plane that carried the hazardous material called
"oxygen generators" (hazardous material/dangerous good) in their cargo hold, that caught
fire and crashed in the Florida Everglades. All air carriers
have the decision to accept the permitted hazardous materials, or
not, which is a risk decision for their management alone.
After a long involved process of changing the regulations, the result will remain the same, the air
carriers will always get to decide if the hazardous material will or will not board their
planes.
WHAT WOULD IT TAKE TO CHANGE THE CURRENT WORDING, EVEN THOUGH THE
BOTTOM LINE WOULD REMAIN THE SAME AS TODAY?
| STEPS
|
|
| 1. |
Write the United States Department of Transportation describing
the loss of personal safety and possibly financial loss, by the
USDOT and air carriers current policies. This effort may
change the Regulation for domestic air carriers only.
|
| 2. |
To change
the Regulation for international air carriers, the first step
is to have the USDOT carry the issue to the United Nations'
"Subcommittee of Experts on the Transport of Dangerous
Goods". What
countries vote?
|
| 3. |
The U.N.
only makes a recommendation and forwards it to the International
Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) who then debates the
merit of a changed policy for international air carriers.
What countries vote?
|
| 4. |
The International
Air Transportation Association (IATA), an airline trade
association, takes ICAO's regulations, prints them in a tabbed
and illustrated booklet and distributes them to all international air carriers.
|
| 5. |
If USDOT
did not revise their Regulation in step one, they will revise their
regulation at this point, incorporating
ICAO language.
|
| 6. |
Air
carriers still will have the ability to deny the carriage of
hazardous materials.
|
|
NOTES |
| A cylinder manufacturer reports that the
cylinders, used in other applications, are filled with gases
such as Oxygen or Propane. It is their recommendation
that CO2 cylinders not be allowed in carry-on baggage,
because training security personnel at airports to know and
identify the differences would not be cost effective. Accidentally
or intentionally having Oxygen or Propane (both?) in the
passenger compartment is too dangerous. |
| ISAF's International Regulations Committee
reports that all European air carriers refuse CO2 cylinders either as
check-through or carry-on baggage (9/17/01). |
| The United States Department of
Transportation explains that the cylinders have a potential
for rocketing if the pressure is released in an uncontrolled
manner. They may also have the potential of throwing fragments if they rupture in a
situation such as a fire injuring crew, passengers and rescue
personnel. An inflatable PFD may also cause damage if inadvertently activated in
a confined space (overhead bin), or harm a baggage handler
(causing luggage to shift around). The fact that they may be required on an
aircraft installed on the PFD's found under each seat under FAA airworthiness regulations
(which requires inspection by the FAA in order to have them on
board), does not mean
that they should be considered as not hazardous when carried
as cargo or passenger baggage (where your cylinders are not
inspected by the FAA inspectors). The USDOT cannot require
an air carrier to allow hazardous materials on board as
baggage or cargo, they can only allow a few hazardous
materials to be permissible to carry at each airlines risk
tolerance level. |
|