ROFPMSL!!!
You sneaky sod Dave, never knew you took that piccy…
As you can see we are all working hard, while Dave goes to the back of the room for a sneaky piccy…and a pie. 
He was probably having a look in Joey’s bag for leftovers!!!
chooch:
Thanks Diesel Dave, the guy I did my Hiab course warned me that the first day or two would do my head in but it will be done at a nice golf course. Do you have to do any practical i.e. should I take some working gear with me?
Hi chooch, The last of the practicals was done away with around February of last year, so there’s nothing to worry about on that score.
A golf course sounds like a nice peaceful setting, but if the provider doesn’t normally run courses at that venue, then there’s a good chance that there’ll be a visit from an SQA verifier on one of the days of the course. It states in our bible that ‘mobile’ courses are more likely to be subject to a verification visit.
If a verifier does visit, please be advised that they’ll sit quietly at the back of the class and not usually take part in the proceedings. The verifier isn’t there to look at the candidates, he’s there to assess whether the training follows the syllabus and that the instructor gives accurate info and runs as per the published timetable. Also included in the verifier’s checklist is that the correct equipment and training aids are available and fit for purpose. The checklist is quite detailed, and generates a four-page written report that gets sent to the instructor’s boss. 
To Diesel Dave, 4 more pies going north tomorrow to Leeds. I will try to throw you one as I go past 
aranger:
Maybe its just me but I felt the 5 days were excessive and expensive for what a driver actually needs to know.
Hi arranger, No mate, it’s not just you that thinks it’s excessive, because SQA seem to agree with you.
The ADR course has already been looked at in terms of its length, and the decision is that it WILL be shortened, or at least a shorter version offered as an option.
It’s early days yet, but the syllabus is due for overhaul in line with when the new UK dangerous goods Regs come out on 01/07/09.
As is usual when changes happen to most things, there will be winners and losers.
An initial ADR course looks set to be reduced to three days including the exams (from the present 3.5 days,) whilst the tanker course looks set to be reduced from 1.5 days to just one day.
The idea of a refresher ADR course being half the length of an initial course also looks set to be dumped, because statistics prove that the refresher people are struggling with the amount of knowledge that SQA expects them to have retained. Exam results confirm this, so it’s pretty much indisputable. The pressure on instructors to deliver the ADR refresher course within the 2.5 day time limit is the same as the candidates feel, so we’re all on the same side on this point. 
To address this issue, it’s likely that refresher people will sit the same course as the initial people, so up to now everybody seems to come out slightly ahead.
As a self-employed freelance ADR instructor, the overall effect of this is that it’ll put me on a four-day week in the weeks in which I can find work. My problem is that if I try to recoup the lost day’s wages by increasing my daily rate, the ADR providers might not use me so often… 
aranger:
Need to take a 3 day refresher course next year and can`t remember half of it because most of it I felt was down to the operator.
That might not be the reason for not being able to remember it, because it’s not for any of us to alter the requirements of the syllabus. This comes from the DfT and is non-negotiable, so providers, instructors and drivers are stuck with it. There has been a consultation process in which all the providers were invited to partake, so we’re all waiting for the final syllabus to be released to us.
Watch this space…
dieseldave:
To address this issue, it’s likely that refresher people will sit the same course as the initial people, so up to now everybody seems to come out slightly ahead.
Would there be a problem if those that were due the 3 day refresher decided to do the initial 3 day course again 
My thinking is that, at present, the initial is worth 21 hours of driver CPC accreditation whereas the refresher is only worth 7 hours.
ROG:
dieseldave:
To address this issue, it’s likely that refresher people will sit the same course as the initial people, so up to now everybody seems to come out slightly ahead.Would there be a problem if those that were due the 3 day refresher decided to do the initial 3 day course again
My thinking is that, at present, the initial is worth 21 hours of driver CPC accreditation whereas the refresher is only worth 7 hours.
Hi ROG, Given the info that’s presently available, your idea is a good one IMHO.
However, it has been pointed out to the DSA that the cut-down version of the refresher course is likely to disappear, so it’s a shame they didn’t consult properly with SQA first. 
There is nothing in the rules which prevents a driver doing an initial ADR course at any time they wish, even to the extent of ignoring the fact that they’re already qualified. ADR entitlement is always based on the date that a person did the core module.
Thanks Dave its good to know I wasn`t moaning my arse off for nothing.
Bombard people with info. they probably wont need may make them forget the important parts they do.
As the op says its daunting at the start though you do get there in the end its to discover a slimlined version would have done you.
aranger:
Thanks Dave its good to know I wasn`t moaning my arse off for nothing.Bombard people with info. they probably wont need may make them forget the important parts they do.
As the op says its daunting at the start though you do get there in the end its to discover a slimlined version would have done you.
Hi arranger, As I mentioned, the syllabus comes from the DfT and is non-negotiable.
The background to this is that the DfT is the UK ‘Competent Authority’ (CA) for all ADR matters relevant to the UK. Remembering that ADR is designed to regulate international transport, there needs to be something that makes it a binding law within the UK. That’s the reason for the UK having its own set of domestic Regs, currently CDG 2007. The various versions of CDG have been getting thinner and thinner over recent years as we head for an almost complete merger with ADR.
Here is the UK legal basis for the training of vehicle drivers:
CDG 2007 Reg. 64:
Training of the vehicle crew
64.–(1) This regulation applies to carriage by road.
(2) A carrier shall ensure that a driver required to be trained in accordance with Sub-section
8.2.1.1–
(a) has received training which complies with Section 8.2.1 which is relevant to the goods,
person and type of vehicle in question;
As you can see, there is a reference in UK law to ADR 8.2.1, which is:
ADR 2007 8.2.1:
8.2.1 General requirements concerning the training of drivers
Within 8.2.1 is the following:
8.2.1.1 Drivers of vehicles carrying dangerous goods shall hold a certificate issued by the competent authority or by any organization recognized by that authority stating that they have participated in a training course and passed an examination on the particular requirements that have to be met during carriage of dangerous goods.
To comply with 8.2.1.1, the exams are set by SQA, and the licences are issued by DVLA Swansea both of which are on behalf of the DfT.
That now takes us to the subject of what must be studied ie. the syllabus, which is also to be found within ADR 2007 8.2.1:
ADR 2007 8.2.1.2:
Drivers of vehicles carrying dangerous goods shall attend a basic training course. Training shall be given in the form of a course approved by the competent authority. Its main objectives are to make drivers aware of hazards arising in the carriage of dangerous goods and to give them basic information indispensable for minimizing the likelihood of an incident taking place and, if it does, to enable them to take measures which may prove necessary for their own safety and that of the public and the environment, for limiting the effects of an incident. This training, which shall include individual practical exercises, shall act as the basis of training for all categories of drivers covering at least the subjects defined in 8.2.2.3.2.
Now for the part you’ve been waiting for
ADR 2007 8.2.2.3.2:
Subjects to be covered by the basic course will be, at least:
(a) General requirements governing the carriage of dangerous goods;
(b) Main types of hazard;
(c) Information on environmental protection in the control of the transfer of wastes;
(d) Preventive and safety measures appropriate to the various types of hazard;
(e) What to do after an accident (first aid, road safety, basic knowledge about the use of protective equipment, etc.);
(f) Marking, labelling, placarding and orange-coloured plate marking;
(g) What a driver should and should not do during the carriage of dangerous goods;
(h) Purpose and the method of operation of technical equipment on vehicles;
(i) Prohibitions on mixed loading in the same vehicle or container;
(j) Precautions to be taken during loading and unloading of dangerous goods;
(k) General information concerning civil liability;
(l) Information on multimodal transport operations;
(m) Handling and stowage of packages;
(n) Instructions on behaviour in tunnels (prevention and safety, action in the event of fire or other emergencies, etc.).
So, to put it quite simply and with all due respect, the DfT have ruled, so that’s that.
Any ADR provider or instructor found to be short-cutting the above will face some pretty severe sanctions if this comes to light during a verification visit.
Just as in any other walk of life, there is a cowboy element and I’ve known at least two providers who have had their DfT licences withdrawn following a grade 4 report, but since I’m self-employed and value my authority to instruct, the cowboys needn’t bother asking me to work for them.
The horses tied to a hitching rail outside their office are a good clue…
Don`t get me wrong I never felt that I was being fleeced if that’s the right way to put it and I understood that each part had to be taken separately so there would have to be a degree of overlapping it was all this it is the operators responsibility for this and somebody else’s for that.
It gave me the feeling that I could have went into my work in the morning and be told look you are carrying such and such today put these plates up keep a hold of the tremcard for the emergency services and ffs don’t be throwing ■■■ doubts at it.
The first couple of days I thought I was on a course for first degree chemistry and making excuses about why I couldn`t take it in.
I think when you realise the Bunsen burners are not coming out you start to calm down and by day four or five it all becomes much clearer.
The fact I was the only one there who payed for it himself didn`t help me either.
By the end of it I was glad I did it as it never hurts to learn. 
Something I could ask, as you know I carried whisky and when I started I was told that I never needed my ADR to carry barrels and to turn my plates around when doing so as whisky barrels only had something like 320 ltrs but huggies you did as they where 380 ltrs.
Now you got 105 barrels on and 88 huggies so it was pretty much the same total of whisky or the ethanol that was present for dangerous goods purposes.
I thought if one barrel caught fire the whole shabang would go up so how does that work.
It must be right as they had their own training school but I was somewhat confused. 
aranger:
Don`t get me wrong I never felt that I was being fleeced if that’s the right way to put it and I understood that each part had to be taken separately so there would have to be a degree of overlapping it was all this it is the operators responsibility for this and somebody else’s for that.
That’s because they covered the syllabus correctly.
I’d suggest to drivers that it might be a good idea to know something of the responsibilities of the other folk involved in the whole transport chain, because it has been known for consignors to tell the odd ‘porkie’ in order to get a job done.
Another reason for a ‘general’ approach is that there are guys who do ‘general’ haulage, who need a broad approach that covers most situations.
aranger:
It gave me the feeling that I could have went into my work in the morning and be told look you are carrying such and such today put these plates up keep a hold of the tremcard for the emergency services and ffs don’t be throwing ■■■ doubts at it.
That’s about the size of for the job that you do, but there are other types of dangerous goods haulage to consider.
aranger:
The first couple of days I thought I was on a course for first degree chemistry and making excuses about why I couldn`t take it in.
That might be because you’d decided in advance what the course should be about…
I’d say it’s very helpful if guys keep an open mind and don’t approach the course with any preconceptions.
aranger:
I think when you realise the Bunsen burners are not coming out you start to calm down and by day four or five it all becomes much clearer.
Our book of teaching rules for the ADR course actually forbids any kind of ‘live’ demonstrations.
The other thing I’d point out is that neither a driver, an ADR instructor, nor a DGSA needs any knowledge of chemistry.
The course is mostly law-based, rather than chemistry based.
aranger:
The fact I was the only one there who payed for it himself didn`t help me either.By the end of it I was glad I did it as it never hurts to learn.
They got you there in the end then!!
aranger:
Something I could ask, as you know I carried whisky and when I started I was told that I never needed my ADR to carry barrels and to turn my plates around when doing so as whisky barrels only had something like 320 ltrs but huggies you did as they where 380 ltrs.Now you got 105 barrels on and 88 huggies so it was pretty much the same total of whisky or the ethanol that was present for dangerous goods purposes.
I thought if one barrel caught fire the whole shabang would go up so how does that work.
It must be right as they had their own training school but I was somewhat confused.
The rules for when you come into scope of ADR were radically altered in 2004.
Coincidentally, this is also when the drivers’ responsiblity was much reduced. The responsibilities then were divided between the consignor and the carrier.
Since your question relates to UN Class 3, sorry but the first thing I’d point out is that whether a blazing barrel would set fire to the rest of the load has absolutely nothing to do with anything.
The way it works for most class 3 substances is based on the flashpoint.
A substance that has a low flashpoint is more dangerous than a substance with a high flashpoint, therefore PGI has a lower ‘freebie’ limit than a less dangerous substance that’s in PGIII.
Since 10/05/04:
Class 3, PGI has a freebie limit of 20ltrs
Class 3, PGII has a freebie limit of 333ltrs
Class 3, PGIII has a freebie limit of 1,000ltrs
ooops, double post 
The way it works for most class 3 substances is based on the flashpoint.
Cheers mate thats me completed half my refresher at home.
Dont suppose I will get half a day off it now.
Thanks for taking the time.
aranger:
The way it works for most class 3 substances is based on the flashpoint.
Cheers mate thats me completed half my refresher at home.
Dont suppose I will get half a day off it now.
Thanks for taking the time.
Hi arranger, no probs mate, I’m always glad to help.
For some light reading, you could try the ADR dangerous goods sticky in the H&S forum, there’s lots of good stuff written in there.