Equipment Dive School Fined For Negligence - Australia

[DandyDon]

A volunteer instructor lost a leg and they were fined $40,000 = $25,998 USD. Australian regs require visual inspections and hydros annually...

Dive-school fined for explosion that cost instructor's leg

Australian Diving Instruction, a PADI 5* instructor development centre in Geelong, south of Melbourne in Victoria, has been fined Aud $40,000 (£20,460) for

divernet.com

Australian Diving Instruction, a PADI 5* instructor development centre in Geelong, south of Melbourne in Victoria, has been fined Aud $40,000 (£20,460) for the explosion of an out-of-test scuba cylinder that resulted in a diver's leg being blown off.

Half of the 53 cylinders in use at the dive-school’s premises were later found to be out of test, though they had not been kept separate from those that were in test.

Charged under the name Stelkea Pty, the company was sentenced without conviction at Geelong Magistrates Court on 14 November, having pleaded guilty to one charge of failing to provide a safe workplace.

In Australia, a court has the discretion to find an offender guilty but choose, on a variety of grounds, not to record a conviction. The company was ordered to pay costs of $4,386 (£2,260).

The male diving instructor, described as a volunteer by health & safety authority WorkSafe Victoria, had been filling the cylinders with air at Australian Diving Instruction’s workplace in October 2022, and was said to have been following standard procedure.

As he had been closing the valve on one of the cylinders he heard a whistling noise. Within seconds the cylinder had exploded, severing his left leg below the knee and severely injuring his right foot. The man was taken to hospital for emergency surgery.

The dive-shop’s windows were blown out, with debris scattered about and “significant” internal structural damage caused to the building.

Annual testing​

Australian Standards stipulate that scuba cylinders should be visually inspected and pressure-tested at a certified testing station every 12 months. A WorkSafe investigation found that the cylinder that exploded had been out of test, though it could not be established when it had last been tested.

It would have been “reasonably practicable” for Australian Diving Instruction to keep out-of-test cylinders separate from those in test for safety purposes, the court found.

“This is a horrific and preventable incident that has sadly left a worker with life-changing injuries,” said WorkSafe executive director of health and safety Sam Jenkin.

“It is particularly disturbing to see the failure in this case, given that diving is an industry where keeping equipment properly maintained and ensuring it complies with appropriate standards can be the difference between life and death.”

Australian Diving Instruction was founded as a dive-club in 1984 and became a PADI dive-centre in 2012.

 

[RIHappyDiver]

It would be interesting, and helpful, to find out how far out from the 1 year mark the other 26ish tanks were. But, we’ll probably never know.

Erik

 

[Biotech Diver]

I know zero about tank testing and inspection procedures, so can someone who has done this explain how it’s done, what they look for, and what criteria would have been used to inspect this tank and rejected it? How would the defect in this tank have likely been detected during the inspection and testing process to re-certify it?

 

[chillyinCanada]

As horrible as this "accident" was, the man is lucky to have his life.

I knew another person who was killed outright and in a very bloody manner.

The matter of tanks needing to be in test is well known. There should not be "accidents" like this anywhere.

 

[DandyDon]

I know zero about tank testing and inspection procedures, so can someone who has done this explain how it’s done, what they look for, and what criteria would have been used to inspect this tank and rejected it? How would the defect in this tank have likely been detected during the inspection and testing process to re-certify it?

If (?) my understanding is correct, in the US a visual inspection is required annually whereupon the valve is removed and the inside of the tank is inspected for corrosion or other problems and I suppose the licensed inspector uses some special optical tool. A hydro test is required every five years subjecting the tank to tremendous pressure to ensure that it'll stand the strain ok. Visuals are not required in the Carribean I don't think; just five-year hydros. Other countries may have their own requirements while some don't bother.