Reverse logistics operations are particularly prone to hazmat violations because employees aren't always aware they're handling hazardous goods. Here's how to minimize risk to your operation.
Contributing Editor Toby Gooley is a writer and editor specializing in supply chain, logistics, and material handling, and a lecturer at MIT's Center for Transportation & Logistics. She previously was Senior Editor at DC VELOCITY and Editor of DCV's sister publication, CSCMP's Supply Chain Quarterly. Prior to joining AGiLE Business Media in 2007, she spent 20 years at Logistics Management magazine as Managing Editor and Senior Editor covering international trade and transportation. Prior to that she was an export traffic manager for 10 years. She holds a B.A. in Asian Studies from Cornell University.
It's no secret that managing the product returns supply chain is different from handling the traditional outbound, or "forward" logistics, function—a fact that makes "reverse logistics" daunting to many practitioners.
You can add this to the list of challenges: Many returns contain hazardous materials, an inconvenient truth that often goes unnoticed by retailers.
For manufacturers, this is generally not a problem. They know their products' properties and handle returns in compliance with the laws and regulations that govern hazmat transportation, distribution, and storage. Retailers' employees, though, don't always recognize the potential hazards inherent in some consumer products. As a result, they may unknowingly violate federal laws and regulations.
Such ignorance puts companies at risk for penalties, lawsuits, employee injury, and property damage. And the risk isn't going away. Due to retailers' increasingly liberal returns policies, the volume of hazardous consumer goods in the reverse logistics stream is likely to increase, according to experts. Consumers' "voracious appetite for consumer electronics and the shrinking lifespan of these devices" means that hundreds of millions of potentially hazardous products are returned or discarded annually on a worldwide basis, says Joe King, vice president of sales, aftermarket solutions, for third-party logistics service provider ModusLink.
That's why it's more important than ever that reverse logistics operations be fully compliant with hazmat laws and regulations, not only at the warehouse or returns center but also at the retail store level. Costly though that may be, the potential consequences of failing to ensure compliance—possibly life-threatening injuries to employees and customers, lawsuits, enormous fines, and damage to facilities—are far worse.
Here's a look at the extent of this troubling situation, the reasons behind it, and what can be done about it.
For more information ...
Here are some resources for information on reverse logistics for hazardous products.
The Council on Safe Transportation of Hazardous Articles (COSTHA), an industry association that promotes regulatory compliance and safety, has launched a reverse logistics initiative and is working with retailers and government agencies to improve awareness, safe handling, and regulatory compliance. The group's recommendations to the U.S. Department of Transportation are available on its website.
The American Public University, an online educational institution, and its associated American Military University, periodically offer courses on reverse logistics, including one for hazardous materials. For details, click here and here.
The Dangerous Goods Advisory Council advocates for responsible regulation and safe transportation of dangerous goods. Note: The organization's website is being revamped, so some information about training and other services may be temporarily unavailable.
Wait—that's hazardous?
A surprising number of consumer products are regulated as hazardous materials. Some, like household cleaners and solvents, are fairly obvious, says Keith Anderson, senior director of regulatory compliance for Inmar, a third-party logistics company. But the average person may not think of items like health and beauty care products, aerosols, and batteries as hazardous, he says.
Most consumer electronics, including televisions, cameras, mobile handsets, computer monitors, and printers, contain materials that could be considered hazardous, says King. "Televisions, for example, are built with electronic circuit boards, glass, and color cathode ray tubes (CRTs), which often contain hazardous materials such as lead and mercury, as well as lesser-known toxins like cadmium, chromium, antimony, beryllium, and brominated flame retardants," he explains.
Sometimes only parts of consumer goods are subject to regulation, says Robert Jaffin, who teaches an online course in hazmat reverse logistics for the American Public University. Seemingly innocuous components like the toner in printer cartridges or the ink in dry-erase markers become a health and regulatory risk when a commercial entity accepts them as returned goods, he says.
Some items that were not subject to regulation when purchased by the consumer may be hazardous when they are returned, notes Jack Currie, administrator of the Council on Safe Transportation of Hazardous Articles (COSTHA) and president of the regulatory compliance firm Currie Associates. Examples include construction, camping, and lawn and garden equipment powered by gasoline, kerosene, or propane. If these machines have been used, then there will be fuel, oil, and—most dangerous of all—volatile vapor in the fuel tanks, fuel lines, and engines, he says.
Regulated products that were properly packaged, documented, and handled when shipped to a retailer's distribution center often aren't recognized as hazmats when consumers return them. That's partly due to a lack of awareness among store associates, many of whom are working in part-time, seasonal, or high-turnover positions and may not have been fully trained in hazmat regulatory compliance or even overlooked altogether.
As a result, Currie says, it's common for customer service or stockroom associates to toss hazardous (and frequently incompatible) items in any handy cardboard box or returnable tote, and then return them—undeclared, unprotected, and often mislabeled—to a warehouse or distribution center.
The presence of hazardous materials in returned consumer goods poses both legal and safety risks for reverse logistics operations, experts say. However, steps can be taken to minimize those risks and comply with applicable regulations. While not a comprehensive list, the following tips from the experts we consulted for this article can get a company headed in the right direction:
Follow the same hazmat policies and procedures you use in forward logistics in your reverse logistics operations. All of the legal and safety requirements that apply to outbound shipments also apply to returns. That includes documentation, labeling, packaging, transportation, mitigation and safety plans, and training, Anderson says. Make sure the returned-goods areas of facilities have the necessary safety equipment, and that insurance coverage reflects these hazmat-related activities and conditions, Jaffin advises.
Train the right people. Experts recommend that anybody who could be called on to handle returned consumer goods, whether at a customer service desk, in a stockroom, in transportation, or at the warehouse or returns center, receive job-appropriate hazmat safety training.
Teach employees to recognize "red flags." Rather than focus on specific products, think in terms of categories that are likely to contain hazardous materials. Employees should know, for example, that all lighting, aerosols, home electronics, cleaning supplies, pet care products, perfumes and nail polishes, and lawn and garden care products—to name just a few—could contain hazardous materials, and they should handle all such returns accordingly.
Pay attention to packaging. Whether at the customer service desk, in the stockroom, or at the shipping dock, employees need to know they can't randomly toss an assortment of items into any available box, Currie says. Returned consumer goods containing hazardous materials must be properly packaged and secured in accordance with Department of Transportation (DOT) regulations before they're sent to a warehouse or returns center. Jaffin points out that companies are required by law to report improperly packaged hazmat shipments to DOT. "You have accepted considerable responsibility if you receive and open those shipments," he warns.
Segregate incompatible merchandise. Train store and stockroom associates to separate products that could produce a dangerous reaction. Currie cites one case where retail associates shipped a drum containing water-activated fumigants together with bottles of cleaning fluids to a returns center. A single leak would have released toxic gas—with potentially fatal consequences for anyone who opened the drum at the warehouse. And don't package food or consumables with "ORM-D" items—consumer packaged goods classified as hazardous by DOT. Because of the risk of contamination, the consumables may no longer be fit for use and will have to be destroyed.
Be aware that some returned consumer goods must be treated as hazardous waste. Because returned items that are leaking, damaged, or have expired must sometimes be classified as hazardous waste, a hazardous waste program should be in place at the retail location, DC, and reverse logistics operation, recommends Anderson of Inmar. That will require registration as a hazardous waste generator, employee training, a designated hazardous waste storage area, and compliance with a number of specific regulatory requirements.
Send in the experts. Even with training, retail associates who handle customer returns may need additional support to ensure they're complying with all of the applicable regulations. Some consumer product manufacturers help out by providing approved packaging and instructions for returns, while some power equipment makers send out contractors to clean fuel systems in returned merchandise before it's shipped anywhere. Consider sending consultants, third-party logistics specialists, or your own in-house experts to conduct audits and train associates at the store level. Or you may decide to hand returns management over to a third party. But don't assume that all reverse logistics services are handling your materials properly, cautions King of ModusLink. Ask for copies of documented procedures—not just for direct providers, but also for their vendors, he says.
Congestion on U.S. highways is costing the trucking industry big, according to research from the American Transportation Research Institute (ATRI), released today.
The group found that traffic congestion on U.S. highways added $108.8 billion in costs to the trucking industry in 2022, a record high. The information comes from ATRI’s Cost of Congestion study, which is part of the organization’s ongoing highway performance measurement research.
Total hours of congestion fell slightly compared to 2021 due to softening freight market conditions, but the cost of operating a truck increased at a much higher rate, according to the research. As a result, the overall cost of congestion increased by 15% year-over-year—a level equivalent to more than 430,000 commercial truck drivers sitting idle for one work year and an average cost of $7,588 for every registered combination truck.
The analysis also identified metropolitan delays and related impacts, showing that the top 10 most-congested states each experienced added costs of more than $8 billion. That list was led by Texas, at $9.17 billion in added costs; California, at $8.77 billion; and Florida, $8.44 billion. Rounding out the top 10 list were New York, Georgia, New Jersey, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Louisiana, and Tennessee. Combined, the top 10 states account for more than half of the trucking industry’s congestion costs nationwide—52%, according to the research.
The metro areas with the highest congestion costs include New York City, $6.68 billion; Miami, $3.2 billion; and Chicago, $3.14 billion.
ATRI’s analysis also found that the trucking industry wasted more than 6.4 billion gallons of diesel fuel in 2022 due to congestion, resulting in additional fuel costs of $32.1 billion.
ATRI used a combination of data sources, including its truck GPS database and Operational Costs study benchmarks, to calculate the impacts of trucking delays on major U.S. roadways.
There’s a photo from 1971 that John Kent, professor of supply chain management at the University of Arkansas, likes to show. It’s of a shaggy-haired 18-year-old named Glenn Cowan grinning at three-time world table tennis champion Zhuang Zedong, while holding a silk tapestry Zhuang had just given him. Cowan was a member of the U.S. table tennis team who participated in the 1971 World Table Tennis Championships in Nagoya, Japan. Story has it that one morning, he overslept and missed his bus to the tournament and had to hitch a ride with the Chinese national team and met and connected with Zhuang.
Cowan and Zhuang’s interaction led to an invitation for the U.S. team to visit China. At the time, the two countries were just beginning to emerge from a 20-year period of decidedly frosty relations, strict travel bans, and trade restrictions. The highly publicized trip signaled a willingness on both sides to renew relations and launched the term “pingpong diplomacy.”
Kent, who is a senior fellow at the George H. W. Bush Foundation for U.S.-China Relations, believes the photograph is a good reminder that some 50-odd years ago, the economies of the United States and China were not as tightly interwoven as they are today. At the time, the Nixon administration was looking to form closer political and economic ties between the two countries in hopes of reducing chances of future conflict (and to weaken alliances among Communist countries).
The signals coming out of Washington and Beijing are now, of course, much different than they were in the early 1970s. Instead of advocating for better relations, political rhetoric focuses on the need for the U.S. to “decouple” from China. Both Republicans and Democrats have warned that the U.S. economy is too dependent on goods manufactured in China. They see this dependency as a threat to economic strength, American jobs, supply chain resiliency, and national security.
Supply chain professionals, however, know that extricating ourselves from our reliance on Chinese manufacturing is easier said than done. Many pundits push for a “China + 1” strategy, where companies diversify their manufacturing and sourcing options beyond China. But in reality, that “plus one” is often a Chinese company operating in a different country or a non-Chinese manufacturer that is still heavily dependent on material or subcomponents made in China.
This is the problem when supply chain decisions are made on a global scale without input from supply chain professionals. In an article in the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Kent argues that, “The discussions on supply chains mainly take place between government officials who typically bring many other competing issues and agendas to the table. Corporate entities—the individuals and companies directly impacted by supply chains—tend to be under-represented in the conversation.”
Kent is a proponent of what he calls “supply chain diplomacy,” where experts from academia and industry from the U.S. and China work collaboratively to create better, more efficient global supply chains. Take, for example, the “Peace Beans” project that Kent is involved with. This project, jointly formed by Zhejiang University and the Bush China Foundation, proposes balancing supply chains by exporting soybeans from Arkansas to tofu producers in China’s Yunnan province, and, in return, importing coffee beans grown in Yunnan to coffee roasters in Arkansas. Kent believes the operation could even use the same transportation equipment.
The benefits of working collaboratively—instead of continuing to build friction in the supply chain through tariffs and adversarial relationships—are numerous, according to Kent and his colleagues. They believe it would be much better if the two major world economies worked together on issues like global inflation, climate change, and artificial intelligence.
And such relations could play a significant role in strengthening world peace, particularly in light of ongoing tensions over Taiwan. Because, as Kent writes, “The 19th-century idea that ‘When goods don’t cross borders, soldiers will’ is as true today as ever. Perhaps more so.”
Hyster-Yale Materials Handling today announced its plans to fulfill the domestic manufacturing requirements of the Build America, Buy America (BABA) Act for certain portions of its lineup of forklift trucks and container handling equipment.
That means the Greenville, North Carolina-based company now plans to expand its existing American manufacturing with a targeted set of high-capacity models, including electric options, that align with the needs of infrastructure projects subject to BABA requirements. The company’s plans include determining the optimal production location in the United States, strategically expanding sourcing agreements to meet local material requirements, and further developing electric power options for high-capacity equipment.
As a part of the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, the BABA Act aims to increase the use of American-made materials in federally funded infrastructure projects across the U.S., Hyster-Yale says. It was enacted as part of a broader effort to boost domestic manufacturing and economic growth, and mandates that federal dollars allocated to infrastructure – such as roads, bridges, ports and public transit systems – must prioritize materials produced in the USA, including critical items like steel, iron and various construction materials.
Hyster-Yale’s footprint in the U.S. is spread across 10 locations, including three manufacturing facilities.
“Our leadership is fully invested in meeting the needs of businesses that require BABA-compliant material handling solutions,” Tony Salgado, Hyster-Yale’s chief operating officer, said in a release. “We are working to partner with our key domestic suppliers, as well as identifying how best to leverage our own American manufacturing footprint to deliver a competitive solution for our customers and stakeholders. But beyond mere compliance, and in line with the many areas of our business where we are evolving to better support our customers, our commitment remains steadfast. We are dedicated to delivering industry-leading standards in design, durability and performance — qualities that have become synonymous with our brands worldwide and that our customers have come to rely on and expect.”
In a separate move, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) also gave its approval for the state to advance its Heavy-Duty Omnibus Rule, which is crafted to significantly reduce smog-forming nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions from new heavy-duty, diesel-powered trucks.
Both rules are intended to deliver health benefits to California citizens affected by vehicle pollution, according to the environmental group Earthjustice. If the state gets federal approval for the final steps to become law, the rules mean that cars on the road in California will largely be zero-emissions a generation from now in the 2050s, accounting for the average vehicle lifespan of vehicles with internal combustion engine (ICE) power sold before that 2035 date.
“This might read like checking a bureaucratic box, but EPA’s approval is a critical step forward in protecting our lungs from pollution and our wallets from the expenses of combustion fuels,” Paul Cort, director of Earthjustice’s Right To Zero campaign, said in a release. “The gradual shift in car sales to zero-emissions models will cut smog and household costs while growing California’s clean energy workforce. Cutting truck pollution will help clear our skies of smog. EPA should now approve the remaining authorization requests from California to allow the state to clean its air and protect its residents.”
However, the truck drivers' industry group Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association (OOIDA) pushed back against the federal decision allowing the Omnibus Low-NOx rule to advance. "The Omnibus Low-NOx waiver for California calls into question the policymaking process under the Biden administration's EPA. Purposefully injecting uncertainty into a $588 billion American industry is bad for our economy and makes no meaningful progress towards purported environmental goals," (OOIDA) President Todd Spencer said in a release. "EPA's credibility outside of radical environmental circles would have been better served by working with regulated industries rather than ramming through last-minute special interest favors. We look forward to working with the Trump administration's EPA in good faith towards achievable environmental outcomes.”
Editor's note:This article was revised on December 18 to add reaction from OOIDA.
A Canadian startup that provides AI-powered logistics solutions has gained $5.5 million in seed funding to support its concept of creating a digital platform for global trade, according to Toronto-based Starboard.
The round was led by Eclipse, with participation from previous backers Garuda Ventures and Everywhere Ventures. The firm says it will use its new backing to expand its engineering team in Toronto and accelerate its AI-driven product development to simplify supply chain complexities.
According to Starboard, the logistics industry is under immense pressure to adapt to the growing complexity of global trade, which has hit recent hurdles such as the strike at U.S. east and gulf coast ports. That situation calls for innovative solutions to streamline operations and reduce costs for operators.
As a potential solution, Starboard offers its flagship product, which it defines as an AI-based transportation management system (TMS) and rate management system that helps mid-sized freight forwarders operate more efficiently and win more business. More broadly, Starboard says it is building the virtual infrastructure for global trade, allowing freight companies to leverage AI and machine learning to optimize operations such as processing shipments in real time, reconciling invoices, and following up on payments.
"This investment is a pivotal step in our mission to unlock the power of AI for our customers," said Sumeet Trehan, Co-Founder and CEO of Starboard. "Global trade has long been plagued by inefficiencies that drive up costs and reduce competitiveness. Our platform is designed to empower SMB freight forwarders—the backbone of more than $20 trillion in global trade and $1 trillion in logistics spend—with the tools they need to thrive in this complex ecosystem."