Are hydros really necessary?

[yle]

I live, dive and teach scuba in southern California, but I like to get away a couple times a year to warmer water. I'm in Florida right now and spent this morning diving with a shop that will remain nameless, because the purpose of this post is not to call anyone out.

I have been led to believe that scuba tanks should be hydrostatically tested every 5 years, and until this morning I thought that was a standard rule (from DOT?) that was uniform everywhere in the USA (I know other countries have their own rules.) Our shop at home is strict about this issue: they will not fill a tank without a current hydro.

My son and I boarded the dive boat this morning, which was already loaded with about 50 tanks from the host shop (here in Florida) and started to set up our gear. My son brought to my attention that his tank was out of hydro; its last hydro date was 7 years ago. I then checked my tank: it was manufactured in 2006 and hadn't been hydro'd since. We then checked several other tanks down the rack and it appeared about 3 out of 4 had not been hydro'd within the last 5 years.

My son (also an instructor, works at a shop at home) brought this to the attention of one of the crew. The crewguy shrugged as if to say "so... what do you want?" He then specifically asked if my son wanted a different tank, and when we explained that we were more concerned about the shop not following proper safety procedures, the crewguy joked that he promised if the tank failed while we were diving the shop wouldn't hold us responsible.

I felt like I was being punked, and looked around for the cameras. This had to be a joke... but all the cameras were sitting in the bucket. No one was pointing one at me.

I did a rough calculation of the odds and decided they were in my favor (i.e. the tanks were unlikely to fail on my dive, and we were only there for the one day.) We dove and we both survived, as did everyone else on the boat.

But as we drove away my son and I agreed it seems like one of those things that will only take one dive accident and an aggressive attorney to nail the shop on an out of hydro tank, even if it had nothing to do with the accident (I'm sure a decent attorney could convince a jury that the neglect of hydro testing establishes the kind of standards of safety the shop employs. I'm no legal expert... but neither are the jurors that give plaintiffs their awards.)

So it got me thinking: how "standard" is the hydro test rule of every 5 years? Do some shops just sort of follow it? Is it more commonly followed in some parts of the country and not others? I am very interested in feedback only because I'm now starting to believe that my previous understanding of the hydro rule, based on my shop's policy back home, is not accurate.

Please share your experience. I like to share this kind of information with my students, i.e. "The book says this, but you are likely to find that in other parts of the country or the world."

Thank you...

 

[Akimbo]

Necessary and required are two different things. Their insurance company “might” not specifically require it in their policy, but will probably hang them out to dry if one fails and there is damage to property of people. The requirement to hydro in the US is by the DOT (Department of Transportation).

 

[tc]

5 years is the standard throughout the US, mandated by DOT.

Can you get away with not inspecting a tank? Sure- right up till the time it fails, most commonly while it is being filled so the greatest risk is at the fill station.

It's not common for tanks to fail but the Hydro test and the visual inspections are part of the reason it's uncommon. Tanks that are showing damage or rust are taken out of service when the damage is seen during a vis and if the metal of the tank has been stressed then the hydro test will show that and get it removed from service before it fails.

I suppose the best way to check if hydro's are effective would be to check with a facility that does a lot of them and see what percentage of tanks fail. We can't assume that all tanks that fail would end up with a catastrophic failure but the odds of that happening would go up significantly on those tanks.

That shop and boat are cutting corners- the next question is what other corners they have cut that could affect your safety. I would talk to the manager or owner of the shop and ask if that's normal for them, if it is I think I'd take my business elsewhere.

 

[Jim Lapenta]

The hydro test is not an industry rule. I believe it is a DOT rule for any tanks used for commercial purposes. I know of some divers with their own compressors that are lax about it but then they are the only ones using their tanks. I would not be surprised to see what you stated in some third world country. But in the US with all the lawyers we have just waiting to wet their beaks on a lawsuit involving injury or death that shop is one that I would not want to dive with. They are putting other divers at risk. One tank a month or so out may be no big deal. But when you have a bunch of them years out, with god knows how many fills on them, and the lax attitude. Not naming them is possibly putting another diver at risk who may not be aware of this and happens to be standing there when one of those tanks fails and kills or injures him.
Doing the right thing morally and ethically is never calling someone out. It's protecting the dive community as a whole. Who else knows what other short cuts they have taken. I would not hesitate to name them. They obviously know about it and don't give a rats butt.

---------- Post added July 22nd, 2014 at 07:00 PM ----------

And as an instructor in the US you should know that the hydro is a DOT rule. Morally and ethically would you let your loved ones dive one of those? I wouldn't. I'm surprised you and your son did dive them. As instructors where are your own standards in this area?

 

[yle]

Thanks Jim... I was 99% sure it was a DOT rule. I was also more than 99% sure we would survive the day. As other commenters have posted, the greatest danger is to the person filling the tank.

I did the quick pros and cons and realized (1) the tanks were very unlikely to fail on our dives and (2) I might be wrong about the absolute necessity of hydro-ing tanks every 5 years. This is why I started this thread. I wanted to find out how common this practice is. This shop is the only one I've ever run across with this issue, but my experience is limited. So I reached out to the broader experience of the scubaboard community. And I thank all of you for your input, it IS very helpful.

 

[Doppler]

Thanks Jim... I was 99% sure it was a DOT rule. I was also more than 99% sure we would survive the day. As other commenters have posted, the greatest danger is to the person filling the tank.

I did the quick pros and cons and realized (1) the tanks were very unlikely to fail on our dives and (2) I might be wrong about the absolute necessity of hydro-ing tanks every 5 years. This is why I started this thread. I wanted to find out how common this practice is. This shop is the only one I've ever run across with this issue, but my experience is limited. So I reached out to the broader experience of the scubaboard community. And I thank all of you for your input, it IS very helpful.

I have to second what Jim mentioned about naming names... one tank a month or two out of hydro would be an understandable oversight, but several cylinders years out of date in constant "commercial" use in a saltwater environment smacks of something else. As a dive professional you can make your own decisions, but man, you really should think long and hard about this: How would you feel if next week you hear that some poor schmuck died while filling tanks at that shop?

 

[tbone1004]

I thought the rule on Hydro was for commercial vessels and any vessels being transported over state lines. I.e. Joe Diver living in High Springs with his own compressor who only dived within Fl. didn't have to hydro his tanks, but any dive shop tanks, or anyone taking their tanks outside of the state had to have them hydro'd. Luckily the tanks should only ever have issues while filling, but the other big reality is making sure the VIP stickers are up to date because those will fail tanks much more often than hydro's will

 

[mathauck0814]

DOT requires tanks to be hydrostatically inspected and certified for commercial transportation of gas. If you're not transporting tanks for commercial purposes, my understanding is that you're outside of their jurisdiction. If you have your own filling station (given that most of the "rules" that are enforced about tank maintenance are to protect the person doing the fill) then go with what you're comfortable with. If you need to use someone else's then tank maintenance is as necessary as they require it to be.

 

[tc]

There should never be a current visual sticker on a tank that's out of hydro- all the agencies I'm aware of require checking the hydro stamp as part of the visual process and you're not supposed to date the sticker so that it expires AFTER the expiration of the hydro.

That procedure is designed to prevent a tank fill station operator from doing a quick check on the sticker and forgetting to check the hydro stamp.

 

[tbone1004]

TC, you're 100% correct, but there is nothing from stopping a dive shop that owns their own compressor and VIP's their own tanks from throwing a sticker on there that is out of hydro. Unfortunately you can't always trust that because they could just slap a VIP sticker on there without actually performing the VIP. I fill my own tanks, vip my own tanks, and O2 clean my own tanks, I try to avoid renting like the plague for that reason. Have seen way too many tanks that aren't as clean as they should be, or out of hydro or vip from students renting tanks it's not even funny.