Tanker drivers: beware of markings grief (with pics)

I did a double-take when I saw these markings.
It looks like somebody had a bucketful of tanker markings and threw the lot at it, but the markings are still incorrect and therefore illegal in several respects.
This isn’t a naming and shaming session, so to obey the forum rules, I’ve heavily photoshopped all the relevant info to protect the guilty.

The message here is that if somebody puts markings like this on your tanker, you should report this to your boss and shouldn’t really drive it unless you and your boss like collecting PG9s.
Providing the markings isn’t the responsibility of an employed driver, but it is the driver’s name that goes in the police/VOSA officer’s notebook and the driver who gets held up and generally inconvenienced until compliance is achieved.
The subject of tanker markings is required to be covered in the ADR tanker module and there are tanker exam questions on the subject, so lets see who can spot what problems this guy might face if stop-checked on the journey??
Rear view:

Side view:

if i ring that number would they help ?

cannot read the number plate

my licence states tare along the dotted white line officer…

glenman:
if i ring that number would they help ?

Hi glenman, The phone number on a tanker marking is where specialist expert advice on the substance is available to the fire-brigade in the event of an accident/incident involving the ‘stuff’ being carried, so IMHO you’d be more likely to get an industrial chemist answering the phone rather than somebody who understands Regs.

I should have pointed out in my post that I’m NOT looking for any specialist knowledge here, it’s purely a straightforward ‘markings’ question (without any trickery) covering a driver’s knowledge of what’s expected.

Is there such a thing as FLAMMABLE TOXIC

zorg2006:
cannot read the number plate

Hi zorg2006, That’s the whole idea mate, cos we’re not doing ‘naming and shaming.’
TBF, I can tell you that it is a UK plate though, because that can make a difference to the markings used.

ROG:
Is there such a thing as FLAMMABLE TOXIC

Hi ROG, Yes mate, there is.

The substance is UN 1230 METHANOL, 3(6.1) PGII, which is in the same flammability category as petrol, but methanol IS ALSO sufficiently toxic to earn a second placard, so they’ve got that bit correct.

A substance can have up to (but not more than) three identifiable hazards and would then need three placards.
If a substance has more than three identifiable hazards, it loses all those ■■■■ coloured placards and then meets the definition of UN class 9 because it’s then counted as a ‘miscellaneous’ danger.

Class 9 ‘stuff’ can therefore be very dangerous indeed.

you cant mix class 3 with class 6?

the black holding plate which is holding nothing, should be holding something of relevance??

garnerlives:
you cant mix class 3 with class 6?

Hi Jon, Methanol’s properties are that it is BOTH flammable AND toxic, so they’ve got that part spot-on mate.

Are we mixing ADR placarding with home made UK markings.

If we are using ADR alone, the numbers would be 33 over 1230 with 6.1 shown as a secondary hazard. Would ADR require a PSN?

I would prefer markings that will be visible 10 minutes into a fire like metal kemler boards.

The Orange board is in the wrong plane. If it were ADR the numbers 336 over 1230 could be in that orange board in the correct plane. ie, a multiload would use the plain orange board. We are mixing ADR placarding with home made UK markings.

The Orange board is in the wrong plane.

A firemans first glance through his binoculars may tell him it is Methanol from the UN number but he will be expecting to see 2WE in the top line.

Hmm… the cross bones sticker on the tank ■■? will be gone with a fire…

garnerlives:
the black holding plate which is holding nothing, should be holding something of relevance??

Hi Jon, no mate, they’re still OK with that.
The reason that the Class 6 (toxic) placard isn’t in the holder is that it won’t fit because it’s bigger (250mm x 250mm) than the minimum of 200mm x 200mm required by UK Regs, but since it’s bigger than the minimum, it’s OK.

i take my hat off to you hazardous fella,s, give me something 90ft long and 20ft wide anyday than a load with all them numbers on it sat behind me

Ok it’s ages since I’ve had anything to do with ADR but here goes for my Maximum General ignorance points.

Isn’t the orange plate at the rear for used for packages not tankers and isn’t also in the wrong way round as Wheel Nut said.
Aren’t the Toxic markings IMO labels used for shipping not road transport?

Wheel Nut:
Are we mixing ADR placarding with home made UK markings.

Hi Malc, Yes mate, you’re spot-on.

Wheel Nut:
If we are using ADR alone, the numbers would be 33 over 1230 with 6.1 shown as a secondary hazard.

Nearly… The top number would be 336 to indicate a highly flammable liquid that has a toxic secondary hazard.
The placarding of 3+6.1 is correct under both ADR and UK Regs.

Wheel Nut:
Would ADR require a PSN?

No Malc, but IMDG requires a PSN to be shown on two sides of a tank.

Wheel Nut:
The Orange board is in the wrong plane. If it were ADR the numbers 336 over 1230 could be in that orange board in the correct plane. ie, a multiload would use the plain orange board. We are mixing ADR placarding with home made UK markings.

Correctamundo.

Wheel Nut:
I would prefer markings that will be visible 15 minutes into a fire to be used.

Blimey, that was close!!

Wheel Nut:
The Orange board is in the wrong plane.

Correct again Malc, but you might have missed that it isn’t required at all.
Just fancy using something that isn’t required and then fixing it the wrong way up.

Wheel Nut:
A firemans first glance through his binoculars may tell him it is Methanol from the UN number but he will be expecting to see 2WE in the top line.

Spot-on again Malc.
Fire persons expect to see an Emergency Action Code (EAC) in the top portion of a UK tanker marking exactly as the law requires.
In the case of methanol, you’re correct that the EAC to be shown is 2WE.

Now for the part that most folks don’t realise…
Out of the 44 member countries of ADR, the UK still insists on using our home-grown markings system for UK registered tankers doing domestic dangerous goods traffic, whilst the other ADR countries use the same (other) marking system.

muckles:
Ok it’s ages since I’ve had anything to do with ADR but here goes for my Maximum General ignorance points.

Hi muckles, You’ve scored a very low score in the “Maximum General ignorance points” league.

muckles:
Isn’t the orange plate at the rear for used for packages not tankers

Absolutely spot-on.

muckles:
and isn’t also in the wrong way round as Wheel Nut said.

Spot-on again mate.

muckles:
Aren’t the Toxic markings IMO labels used for shipping not road transport?

Spot-on again, but they’d be needed for both shipping AND road and must be shown on paperwork, as labelling on packages, and as placards on tankers.

Here’s a package of methanol correctly marked:

my brain hurts after that.

I actually wrote 15 minutes and edited it to 0 because it looked wrong

I think I confused myself about the orange board when I said we were mixing ADR with Hazchem labels and placards, see I have done it again. HGV, Hazchem, Tremcards, Gallons & Groats. but, when I wor a lad!

dieseldave:

muckles:
Ok it’s ages since I’ve had anything to do with ADR but here goes for my Maximum General ignorance points.

Hi muckles, You’ve scored a very low score in the “Maximum General ignorance points” league.

muckles:
Isn’t the orange plate at the rear for used for packages not tankers

Absolutely spot-on.

muckles:
and isn’t also in the wrong way round as Wheel Nut said.

Spot-on again mate.

muckles:
Aren’t the Toxic markings IMO labels used for shipping not road transport?

Spot-on again, but they’d be needed for both shipping AND road and must be shown on paperwork, as labelling on packages, and as placards on tankers.

Cor! Something went in all those years ago when I did an ADR course.