Topic: Confusion over importance of Tube Diameter in Fireworks Hazard Rating
主题:对管径在定义烟花爆竹危险级别中重要性的困惑
Drafter: Matt Palaszynski (Dunpai Fireworks)
作者:马特(盾牌烟花)
The Liuyang Fireworks industry recognizes that leaders in Hunan Customs face a legal documentation problem where Beijing General Customs have made it very difficult for the Hunan Leaders to meet the needs of the Fireworks Industry and the legal requirements of General Customs of Beijing.
浏阳烟花爆竹产业的所有人认识到，湖南海关领导面临着一个法律文件问题，即湖南海关很难同时满足烟花爆竹产业的需求和北京海关总署的文件要求。
As leaders of the fireworks industry, we understand this difficult position of Hunan Customs. Our goal is to help Hunan customs solve the “legal issue” in the General Customs documents and more importantly to reduce the true risk of fireworks shipping and transport.
我们理解湖南海关作为烟花行业的领导者的困境。我们的目的是帮助湖南海关解决海关总署文件中的“法律问题”，更重要的是降低烟花爆竹运输的真实风险。
The Problem问题: 出口烟花爆竹检验管理办法(2018修改)现行有效 (发文字号海关总署令第238号)[本文底部附有该文件]
– This document has been used since the year 2000. In all of those years, the USA Standard for consumer fireworks (APA 87-1) has been considered to be a “higher standard” than the China Domestic laws and the UN Model Regulations. Article 7 allows for the import country’s standard to be used in place of China regulations if the import country has a “higher standard”. Recently there has been some confusion over the tube diameter. Since USA law does not have a tube diameter limitation, and some USA consumer cakes use 3 inch or even 4 inch “fake tubes”, the mistake has been made people think that these larger tubes are more dangerous. However, this is an error. We will explain below in Appendix A & B that USA consumer cakes are in fact very safe (never a history of an explosion or injury in storage or transport – Appendix A) and we will explain what are the technical differences between the USA Regulations for consumer cakes and the UN Model Regulations and why the USA regulations are in fact “more strict”. – Appendix B.
本文件自2000年以来一直在使用。近几年来，美国消费烟花标准(APA 87-1)一直被认为是比中国国内法和联合国示范条例更严格的标准。海关总署令第238号第7条允许在进口国有“较高标准”的情况下，以进口国的标准取代中国的条例。近几年来，在管径问题上出现了一些困惑。由于美国法律没有限制管的直径，一些美国消费地礼使用3英寸甚至4英寸的“假管”，这个现象让让人们认为这些更大的管子更危险。然而，这是一个错误。我们将在下文附录A和B中解释美国消费地礼实际上是非常安全的(从来没有在储存或运输中爆炸或受伤的历史-附录A)，我们将解释美国消费地礼烟花条例与联合国示范条例之间的技术差异，以及为什么美国的条例实际上“更严格”。-附录B。
Summary: Tube Diameter is not the most important factor for determining risk. Hunan Customs must evaluate burst charge and packing density as higher risk factors than Tube Diameter.
总结：管径不是决定风险的最重要因素。湖南海关须对开苞药和包装密度(产品间距,单位能量密度)进行评估，将其作为较高的风险因素，其次才是管径。
Problem Immediate Solution:问题立即解决方案
- We note that the Problem is not an actual safety issue. In the past 20 years there has not been serious storage or transportation accident involving USA Consumer cakes. Therefore, we feel this is more of a legal documentation issue as opposed to a true safety issue. Evidence of this is presented in Appendix A.
- Order #238, Article 7 states that the UN Model Regulations or the import Country’s Standard can be used if the import Country has a “Higher Standard”. Appendix B will provide evidence that the USA’s standard is in fact a “Higher Standard” (or equivalent) to the UN Model Regulations for Consumer Fireworks.
1.)我们注意到，问题并不是一个实际的安全问题。在过去的20年中，没有发生过涉及美国消费地礼的严重仓储或运输事故。因此，我们认为，这更多的是一个法律文件问题，而不是一个真正的安全问题。这方面的证据载于附录A。
2.)海关总署第238号命令第7条规定，如果进口国有“更高的标准“，则可以使用《联合国危险货物建议书规章范本》或“进口国标准”。附录B将提供证据证明，美国的标准实际上是《联合国危险货物建议书规章范本》的“更严格的标准“(或同等标准)。
Long term Solution:长远解决方案
- Because this is Legal Documentation issue, we believe the long term way to resolve this issue is to modify Order #238 (as was done in 2018).
- We suggest that Article 5 of Order #238 be amended to read. Manufacturers of export fireworks and firecrackers shall produce and store export fireworks and firecrackers in accordance with the relevant laws. For export to the USA product should be built according to the Department of Transportation’s Hazardous Materials Regulations in Title 49, CFR and for USA consumer fireworks with the regulations of the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) published in Title 16, CFR. For other import countries, follow the “United Nations Dangerous Goods Recommendation Model Regulations” and relevant laws and regulations. *** Red is amended words.
- )由于这是法律文档问题，我们认为解决这个问题的长期方法是修改海关总署令第238号令（如2018年所做的那样海关总署令《海关总署关于修改部分规章的决定》修改)
- )我们建议将第238号令第5条修正为:出口烟花爆竹生产企业应当依照有关法律的规定，生产、储存出口烟花爆竹。出口到美国的产品应根据交通部第49卷中的危险材料条例和美国消费品安全委员会的条例制造，出口到美国的产品应符合美国消费者产品安全委员会的规定。(CPSC)发表于标题16，CFR。对于其他进口国，应遵循《联合国危险货物建议书示范条例》和有关法律和条例。***红色字体是修正词。
Appendix A: 附录A：
This section contains proof that USA Consumer Fireworks cakes are very safe and have never caused any explosion or injury in storage or transportation.
Every year several Consumer Fireworks retail or warehouse storage locations are involved in an “ignition”. The results have always been a limited fire with no explosion and no injury caused by the fireworks themselves. Most of these fires are caused by arson where people set the fires out of mischief or curiosity. In some instances it is suspected that the fires were set intentionally as an attempt to collect fire insurance money.
We have done a very fast internet search and identified three examples. There are many more examples for anyone willing to search:
Example #1 – July 4th, 2019 5:45 a.m. Arson suspected in fireworks storage containers near Davey Jones Fireworks, FORT MILL, S.C.
Fire only, no explosion. No one hurt. Cars can be seen driving very near the fire.
https://www.wsoctv.com/news/local/massive-fire-breaks-out-at-fireworks-stand-in-fort-mill/963857892/
本节内容证明，美国消费地礼烟花是非常安全的，从未在储存或运输过程中造成任何爆炸或伤害。
每年都有几个消费者烟花零售或仓库存储地点涉及一个“起火”,结果一直是有限的火灾，没有爆炸，也没有烟花本身造成的伤害。这些火灾大多是由纵火引起的，人们放火是出于恶作剧或好奇。在某些情况下，有人怀疑这些火灾是蓄意纵火，企图收取火灾保险金。
我们已经做了一个非常快的互联网搜索，并确定了三个例子。有更多的例子，任何人都愿意搜索：
案例#1 -2019年7月4日5:45上午涉嫌纵火的烟花仓库附近的戴维琼斯烟花，福特磨坊，南卡罗来纳州。只有火，没有爆炸。没有人受伤。可以看到汽车在离火很近的地方行驶。
https://www.wsoctv.com/news/local/massive-fire-breaks-out-at-fireworks-stand-in-fort-mill/963857892/
Example #2 – Sept. 24, 2018, Stateline Fireworks – Winchester, NH. – Fire started by gunshot. 75 year old man arrested. Fire only, no injury.
案例2–2018年9月24日，州线烟花-温彻斯特，新罕布什尔州。–枪击引起了火灾。75岁男子被捕。只有火，没有伤害。
Example #3 – July 6, 2014 Gannett, TN. Fire only, no explosion. No injury. Cars seen driving close to the fire.
案例 #3-2014年7月6日，甘尼特，TN。只有火，没有爆炸。没有人受伤。看到汽车驶近火场。
https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/local/2014/07/06/east-tennessee-fireworks-engulfed-in-flames/12272149/
Examples of deadly fireworks accidents: (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fireworks_accidents_and_incidents)
Here are examples of deadly international fireworks accidents and an analysis of what type of product has caused the accident. Note that ZERO deadly accidents were caused by USA Consumer Fireworks. 27 accidents were caused by Factory Explosions. This also represents China’s greatest risk for accidents. 14 accidents were caused by 1.3g warehouses. 10 accidents happened in nightclubs which were caused by small non-explosive fireworks that caused a fire. Finally 6 accidents happened in outdoor 1.3g displays.
致命烟花爆竹事故的例子：(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fireworks_accidents_and_incidents)
下面是致命的国际烟花爆竹事故的例子，并分析了是什么类型的产品导致了这一事故。请注意，没有致命事故是由美国消费者烟花造成的。27起事故是由工厂爆炸引起的。这也是中国最大的事故风险。14起事故是由1.3G专业燃放烟花仓库造成的。夜总会发生10起非爆炸性小烟花引发火灾事故。最后在室外1.3G专业燃放表演上发生了6起事故。
Table 1: Examples of deadly fireworks accidents: 表格1:致死烟花事故数据(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fireworks_accidents_and_incidents)
The important point of this table is that USA Consumer Fireworks have never caused a deadly accident. And therefore do not pose the risk that Hunan Customs imagines. The large USA tubes are fake and used for marketing purposes only.
本表的重点是，美国消费烟花从来没有造成致命的事故。因而不构成湖南海关想象的风险。大的美国筒子是假的套筒，仅用于营销目的。
The real risk for accidents center on fireworks factories where loose powder & large quantity of semi-finished goods create a mass explosion explosive danger. Many deadly accident both inside and outside of China confirm this fact. Therefore the fireworks industry needs to focus on reducing factory manufacturing risk as the first priority.
真正的事故风险集中在烟花爆竹工厂，在那里，散落的粉末和大量的半成品造成了大规模爆炸爆炸的危险。中国国内外发生的多起致命事故证实了这一事实。因此，烟花爆竹行业需要把减少工厂制造风险作为第一要务。
The next risk for Hunan Customs revolves around the storage and warehousing of 1.3g fireworks. Keep in mind that some United Nations 1.4g fireworks are classified as 1.3g in USA. This is due to the use of powerful flash powder for the burst charge and due to lack of spacers between tubes. So United Nations 1.4g cakes actually pose a much larger risk of causing deadly explosions than USA Consumer cakes. This is a matter that should be taken very seriously by Hunan Customs.
对于湖南海关,下一个风险是存储出口的1.3G专业燃放类烟花爆竹。请记住，一些联合国运输条例上定义的1.4G烟花在美国被列为1.3G。这是由于使用强大的金属粉末作为开苞药和由于缺乏筒子之间的间隔。因此，联合国运输条例上定义的1.4G地礼实际上造成了比美国消费地礼更大的风险，造成致命的爆炸. 这是湖南海关应该认真对待的问题。
USA 1.3g cakes and UN 1.4g cakes cause “sympathetic propagation” due to the fact that each tube is touching one another with no “air gap” in-between. This leads to one shot quickly igniting the shot next to it via shock and that leads to mass explosions. These mass explosions are what cause deaths. Deaths are not caused by cake insert shells acting as deadly projectiles. Cake inserts do not contain enough kinetic energy to pose a serious threat of death in a transportation or storage accident. Deaths are also not caused by fire unless there is a large crowd of people such as at a public display or indoor nightclub. Public Displays and Nightclubs are not the not the responsibility of Hunan Customs. Therefore, Hunan Customs should focus on “sympathetic propagation”
美国1.3G地礼和联合国运输标准下的1.4G地礼引起“能量快速传导”，因为每个管子相互接触，中间没有“气隙”。这导致一发点燃后存在造成旁边的筒子也被同时点燃，从而导致大规模爆炸(瞬爆)的事故。这些大规模爆炸是导致死亡的原因。地礼的内筒作为致命的抛射物不会造成死亡。地礼的内筒不包含足够的动能在运输或储存事故中造成严重的死亡威胁。除非有一大群人，如在公共展览或室内夜总会，否则死亡也不是由内筒射出直接引起的。大型烟花燃放和夜总会烟花燃放不是湖南海关的责任。因此，湖南海关应注重“能量快速传导”
Wire Cages have been used in the past, but they have been used to reduce a 1.3g item to a 1.4g item. For example, Dutch Cakes that are clearly 1.3g (per USA standards) are shipped in wire cages to change them to 1.4g. The purpose of the wire cage is not to stop the small 30mm shells from flying. The wire cages are intended to prevent “sympathetic propagation” and reduce the chance of a mass explosion. The Dutch are particularly aware of the risks of these powerful 1.4g UN Cakes because of the deadly Enschede fireworks disaster, where 23 people died. So Europe uses wire cages to stop “sympathetic propagation”, the wire cages are not designed to stop the small 30mm shell from flying.
铁笼在过去曾被使用过，但是现在已经被用来将1.3G的产品降低到1.4G。例如，荷兰地礼，显然是1.3G（根据美国标准）是要加铁笼运输的，以便把他们降低到1.4G。铁笼的目的不是阻止小的30毫米内筒飞行。铁笼的作用是防止“能量快速传导”，减少发生大规模爆炸的机会。荷兰人特别意识到这些1.4G联合国运输标准下的盆花的危险，是因为造成23人死亡的恩斯赫德烟火灾难。所以欧洲使用铁笼来阻止“能量快速传导”，铁笼的设计并不是为了阻止30毫米的内筒飞出来。
Conclusion: Mass explosions are the main risk for Hunan Customs. USA Consumer cakes do not mass explode. We have 20 years of evidence and technical analysis to prove this point. Wire Cages are used in Europe to prevent mass explosions. They are not used to stop small shells from shooting. If the goal was to stop small shells, then every cake, including 1 inch and smaller would need a wire cage. When evaluating risk of fireworks small shells should “excluded” from the evaluation. The UN Series 6c was written to classify Explosives and not fireworks. Therefore, the evaluation criteria should exclude fireworks insert shells as these small paper projectiles do not pose any true deadly risk.
Finally, fires started by fireworks at outdoor events or nightclubs are also a risk for fireworks in general, but Hunan Customs is not responsible. Local fire officials can prevent these deaths by ensuring Fire Exits are available in buildings and restricting the use of indoor fireworks unless under supervisions of professionals.
结论：大规模爆炸是湖南海关面临的主要风险。美国的消费地礼不会大规模爆炸。我们有20年的证据和技术分析来证明这一点。铁丝笼在欧洲被用来防止大规模爆炸。它们不是用来阻止小炮弹(内筒)迸射的。如果目标是阻止内筒(球)，那么每个地礼，包括1英寸或更小的地礼,都需要一个金属笼。在评估烟花爆竹的风险时，应将内筒(球)排除在评估之外。联合国系列6c是用来分类爆炸物而不是烟花的。因此，评价标准应排除烟花爆竹的内筒(球)，因为这些内筒(球)不构成任何真正的致命危险。
最后，在户外活动或夜总会燃放烟花爆竹也是烟花爆竹的一个普遍风险，但湖南海关不对需此负责。当地消防官员可以通过确保建筑物有防火出口来防止这些死亡，并限制使用室内烟花爆竹，除非在专业人员的监督下。
Appendix B: 附录B
This section contains technical evidence fireworks are “more strict” then the UN Model Regulations or China Regulations.
USA Regulations Reference: Department of Transportation’s Hazardous Materials Regulations in Title 49, CFR and for USA consumer fireworks with the regulations of the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) published in Title 16, CFR.
本部分包含技术证据，显示美国烟花爆竹比《联合国示范条例》或《中国条例》更“严格”。
美国法规参考：运输部的危险材料条例的第49卷CFR,美国消费烟花与美国消费产品安全委员会的规定(CPSC)发表于标题16，CFR。
https://www.americanpyro.com/assets/docs/PHMSADocs/apa stand 87-01.pdf
Table 2: Technical Criteria for 1.4g Rating USA vs UN: 表格2:美国烟花标准和联合国标准对于1.4G烟花的技术参数对比
Conclusion, the UN Standard and USA Standard have different risk criteria. Hunan Customs can’t only focus on Tube Diameter as the main risk factor. A total of four risk factors must be evaluated.
结论：联合国标准和美国标准有不同的风险标准。湖南海关不能把管径作为主要风险因素。总共有四个风险都必须进行评估。
Table 3 will explain the reasons that USA cakes are less dangerous then cakes made per the UN Model Regulations.
表3将解释美国地礼比根据《联合国运输示范条例》制作的盆花风险更低的原因。
Table 3: Analysis of Risk for USA 1.4g cake vs UN 1.4g cake 表3:关于美国标准1.4G地礼与联合国标准1.4G地礼的风险分析
For Hunan Customs, the most common storage and transportation method for Consumer Fireworks will be in a 40 foot High Cube Metal Ocean Container. These containers typically hold 68 CBM of fireworks.
Therefore, in order to evaluate risk, Hunan Customs should look at the total Powder Weight and the total Flash Powder Weight in a full container of USA cakes vs UN Cakes.
Using this evaluation it is clear to see that USA Cakes are in fact less dangerous and therefore the USA Regulations are “More Strict” then the “UN Model Regulations”. Therefore, USA Cakes >30MM should be allowed to be classified as 1.4g as has been the tradition for more than 20 years.
From this chart it is clear to see that the large USA 3 inch cakes are actually much safer for storage and transportation then the smaller, denser UN cakes. In fact, the UN cakes contain about 200 times more of the powerful “flash powder” and about 10 times more total powder then the large 3 inch USA cakes.
The reason the USA cakes have so much less powder is because they are mostly fake empty space used for marketing purposes to make them appear larger. The goal is to “market the items” as more powerful, but in fact they are less powerful then the small, dense UN cakes.
在湖南海关，最常见的消费烟花储存和运输方法是把烟花装在一个40英尺高的集装箱。这些集装箱一般装68立方米烟花。
因此，为了评估风险，湖南海关应查看美国地礼与联合国规则下地礼全容器的总药量和总炸药重量。
使用这种评估，可以清楚地看到，美国地礼实际上是不那么危险，因此，美国条例是比《联合国示范条例》“更严格”。因此，美国地礼30Mm应该被允许被归类为1.4G的传统已经超过20年。
从这个图表中可以清楚地看到，美国3英寸(实际为2.25英寸的球或者内筒)的地礼对比较小，但是能量密度更大的联合国地礼,实际上美国地礼的存储和运输更加安全。事实上，一个40尺集装箱中,联合国规则下的地礼相比美线3寸9发地礼含有的白药高200倍,总药量比美线的3寸9发大10倍.
美国药量少得多的原因是，它们为了市场营销，加入了很大的隔空让他们看起来更大。其目标是“推销这些物品”，使其看起来功能更强大，但实际上，它们的威力不如联合国的小一些地礼那么强大。
Summary: UN cakes in a normal shipping container, contain 200 more dangerous flash powder and 10 times more total powder.
摘要：联合国规则下的地礼在一个正常的集装箱中，含有200倍的白药和10倍以上总药量。
USA 3 inch 9 Shot cake vs UN 30mm 16 shot cake
美线3寸9发地礼对比联合国标准下的1.2寸16发地礼
The USA cake looks much larger and more dangerous, but in fact it contains much less total powder weight per CBM because it is mostly fake tubes, and empty space used to “market” the item.
美线的地礼体积大很多并威力更大,但是事实上它包含的单位总药量更小,因为它大部分是假的筒管和用于市场营销的大体积.
Final Conclusion:最终结论
Article 7 of import country laws to be used if they are “stricter” than the UN Model Regulations.
出口烟花爆竹检验管理办法(2018修改)现行有效 (发文字号海关总署令第238号)
第七条 出口烟花爆竹的检验应当严格执行国家法律法规规定的标准，对进口国以及贸易合同高于我国法律法规规定标准的，按其标准进行检验。
We have proven both though 20 years of examples of No Accidents and through Technical Analysis that the USA law is in fact stricter for consumer cakes.
The main reason that USA law is “stricter” is that it limits the very powerful “flash powder” which is about 10 times more powerful than normal Black Powder. Also, the USA requires at least 13mm gap between each tube. This space does two things. 1.) It limits the total number of “cakes” that can be loaded into a shipping container. 2.) The empty space acts to absorb the shock from one shot to another and prevents “sympathetic propagation” which is the technical factor that leads to deadly explosions.
Conclusion: Per Article 7 of Order 238, USA Regulations are “stricter” then the UN Model Regulations, therefore Hunan Customs should allow CIQ certificates to be issued for all USA cakes made per the USA Regulations (as has been done for the last 20 years without any storage or shipping accidents from USA consumer cakes in China or abroad).
我们已经通过20多年的无事故案例和技术分析证明，美国法律实际上对消费地礼的定义规则更严格。
美国法律“更严格”的主要原因是，它限制了非常强大的“白药”，威力大约是普通黑药的10倍。另外，美国要求每根管子之间至少有13毫米的间隙。这个空间做两件事。1.)它限制了可以装入船运集装箱的“地礼”的总数。2.)空旷的空间起到了吸收冲击的作用，防止了“交感传播”，这是导致致命爆炸(整体爆炸)的技术因素。
结论：根据238号令第7条，美国法规比《联合国示范条例》“更严格”，因此湖南省海关应允许根据美国法规签发所有美国地礼的检验检疫证书（过去20年来，在中国和国外都没有发生过来自美国消费者蛋糕的储存或运输事故）。
附件:
出口烟花爆竹检验管理办法(2018修改)现行有效
发布：2018-04-28实施：2018-05-01
基本信息
发文字号海关总署令第238号
效力级别部门规章
时效性现行有效
发布日期2018-04-28
实施日期2018-05-01
发布机关中华人民共和国海关总署
法律修订
1999年12月2日国家出入境检验检疫局令第9号发布
根据2018年4月28日海关总署令第238号《海关总署关于修改部分规章的决定》修改
正文
第一条
为加强出口烟花爆竹的检验管理工作，保证出口烟花爆竹的质量，保障公共安全和人身安全，促进对外贸易的发展，根据《中华人民共和国进出口商品检验法》及其实施条例，制定本办法。
第二条
海关总署统一管理全国出口烟花爆竹检验和监督管理工作，主管海关负责所辖地区出口烟花爆竹的检验和监督管理工作。
第三条
出口烟花爆竹的检验和监督管理工作采取产地检验与口岸查验相结合的原则。
第四条
主管海关对出口烟花爆竹的生产企业实施登记管理制度。生产企业登记管理的条件与程序按《出口烟花爆竹生产企业登记细则》办理。
第五条
出口烟花爆竹的生产企业应当按照《联合国危险货物建议书规章范本》和有关法律、法规的规定生产、储存出口烟花爆竹。
第六条
出口烟花爆竹的生产企业在申请出口烟花爆竹的检验时，应当向海关提交《出口烟花爆竹生产企业声明》。
第七条
出口烟花爆竹的检验应当严格执行国家法律法规规定的标准，对进口国以及贸易合同高于我国法律法规规定标准的，按其标准进行检验。
第八条
海关对首次出口或者原材料、配方发生变化的烟花爆竹应当实施烟火药剂安全稳定性能检测。对长期出口的烟花爆竹产品，每年应当进行不少于一次的烟火药剂安全性能检验。
第九条
盛装出口烟花爆竹的运输包装，应当标有联合国规定的危险货物包装标记和出口烟花爆竹生产企业的登记代码标记。海关应当对出口烟花爆竹运输包装进行使用鉴定，以及检查其外包装标识的名称、数量、规格、生产企业登记代码等与实际是否一致。经检查上述内容不一致的，不予放行。
第十条
凡经检验合格的出口烟花爆竹，由海关在其运输包装明显部位加贴验讫标志。
第十一条
各口岸与内地海关应当密切配合、共同把关，加强出口烟花爆竹检验管理和质量情况等信息交流。
第十二条
主管海关每年应当对所辖地区出口烟花爆竹质量情况进行分析并书面报告海关总署，海关总署对各关出口烟花爆竹的检验、管理工作和质量情况进行监督抽查。
第十三条
对违反本办法规定的，根据《中华人民共和国进出口商品检验法》及其实施条例的有关规定予以行政处罚。
第十四条
本办法所规定的文书由海关总署另行制定并且发布。
第十五条
本办法由海关总署负责解释。
第十六条
本办法自2000年1月1日起实施。