Tank failing Visual, shop condemned the tank?

[NAM001]

My approach to this 'gray area' is the same. I feel properly covered by the CGA itself:

"Experience in the inspection of cylinders is an important factor in determining the acceptability of a given cylinder for continued service. Users lacking this experience who have questionable cylinders should return them to a manufacturer of the same type of cylinders or to a competent requalification agency for re-inspection."

CGA C-6 and CGA C-6.1 are the primary documents for steel and aluminum. The re-inspector is responsible for making sure he/she is always testing to the most current standard. The re-inspector is being paid to test to standards. Being overly cautious for your own personal peace of mind is not what the owner is paying for.

I am a newbie inspector. As such, I am overly careful about following the guidelines. I can Accept, Reject, or Condemn a cylinder. If the cylinder is clearly a hazard then I would condemn it and render it unfit for refilling. I was surprised at the amount of internal damage that a cylinder can have and still be serviceable by CGA standards.

There is a lot of 'judgment call' when it comes to cylinders that show internal damage. There are a lot of compromised scuba tanks in daily use and they aren't going off like popcorn on diver's backs. Statistics and my training tell me that the inspection standards are appropriate and should neither be relaxed nor strengthened.

PSI states that an inspector has no right to disable a tank with out the customers prior permission. Doing so can make the inspector buy them a new tank. You can write condemned on the tank but you can not render it unusable. The customer has the right to get a second inspection if they question your results and actions. They are denied that option once you render it unusable. Your agency inspectoin certification may say different but I invite you to call PSI for their supporting documents regarding the practice of rendering tanks unusable with out the owners written permission. There has been problems such as tap stops on a good tank being taken for cracked threads and being rendered unusable. Also instances where the wrong tester was used to electronically check for cracks. 6061 tank will fail if the older device used on the bad luxfers's are used. different alloy different machine needed.

 

[NAM001]

I’m not sure why people told OP to clean the sharpie off. Doesn’t make any difference to the tank or future inspection.

Would you flll a tank if someone wrote condemned on it ?????

 

[lowviz]

PSI states that an inspector has no right to disable a tank with out the customers prior permission. Doing so can make the inspector buy them a new tank. You can write condemned on the tank but you can not render it unusable. The customer has the right to get a second inspection if they question your results and actions. They are denied that option once you render it unusable. Your agency inspectoin certification may say different but I invite you to call PSI for their supporting documents regarding the practice of rendering tanks unusable with out the owners written permission.

I totally understand and I am completely sympathetic to what you write. However, I disagree strenuously on the following grounds:

I was trained to (and serve) CGA standards, not PSI's. Note that CGA offers exemptions and modified re-test procedures. I consider CGA to be most reasonable in that they are clearly taking both sides into consideration. If a tank is in violation of those standards, then don't bring it to me. I will condemn it out of concern for those who would fill it and those who would wear it. This is the fundamental basis of self-regulation. We (all of recreational scuba) police ourselves to reasonable and reproducible standards so that the government can give us the blind eye on this issue. Why give me the power to 'Condemn' if you can just keep shopping it out to other re-testers until you find one who will pass it?

Would you prefer that US civil and criminal law set forth and enforce the use of pressurized recreational cylinders?

A re-tester who chooses to condemn a tank that they are unsure of is the problem. They are paid professionals who are charged with making those close calls. We all have a list of what will kill a cylinder. If it squeaks by, so be it. It is not your right as a re-tester to call everything 'foul' just to cover your a$$.

 

[guruboy]

Would you flll a tank if someone wrote condemned on it ?????

With a sharpie? Yes, if it had valid hydro and VIP.

 

[Ana]

@Ana ,

Your views on this? (I noticed your 'likes' on this thread) I could reference a post or two of yours, but mostly pointless. You know what you posted and you stand by it as do I for all of my posts. As one OF to another...

So, I have now removed the threat to my old steels that some wet behind the ears newbie VIP tester presents to my tried, seasoned, and trusted old girls. I alone do the O2 cleaning and VIP's. SDI sez so and sells me the stickers. Paid the bux, drove 1.2K miles to take the courses from someone who cares and I'm almost good. But there is still that hydro thing...

I have a good hydro re-certifier contact through my new LDS who knows that I know what I'm talking about.

We should all have to do this, no?

I haven't fully followed the thread, because the Hurricane took way too much energy from me, and the weekend was needed to make up for missing dives.

With that said... I have enough trouble with a shop not filling perfectly good tanks just because they don't like the age. For a VIP tester to vandalize my tank is just crossing lines, for sure they will not see one red cent from me, but before I walk out I may ask them to clean off the graffiti. For all I know the tester may or may not have anymore than a 8x10 cert with zero knowledge.

I feel fortunate to have a facility close by in Fort Lauderdale for Hydro testing that specializes on scuba tanks, I think they also do SCBA's but nothing else. Very reasonably price and more importantly knowledgeable people, what a relief. We can do our own VIP's, no longer have stickers but for my husband and I is about the investment on our tanks, we have over a dozen, and like to keep an eye on them to make sure they are actually in good working order, even if we have to pay someone else for a silly sticker.

In general things are getting out of hand as far as gear not being brand new. Not proud to say that a friend of mine changed his perfectly good wing because it was looking a bit grey instead of pure black. He was concerned that his wife's students feel uncomfortable with his old gear when he dove with them. Of course I wanted to smack him but I don't have many friends.

 

[NAM001]

With a sharpie? Yes, if it had valid hydro and VIP.

Many would not. Especially when yanyone can get stickers and put them on with out a formal VIS being done.

 

[Kharon]

I am a newbie inspector. As such, I am overly careful about following the guidelines. I can Accept, Reject, or Condemn a cylinder. If the cylinder is clearly a hazard then I would condemn it and render it unfit for refilling.

No, no, and NO!!!. You can accept and apply a sticker, you can reject and return the tank as it was given to you. You CAN NOT LEGALLY condemn nor can you render it unfit for refilling. If you do so you are destroying another's property and are legally liable for that action. I would sue your a$$ off.

 

[lowviz]

@Kharon

As an inspector, I diligently follow both the law and agency guidelines. Please show me where this is illegal and I will immediately vacate the 'right' to condemn a tank.

 

[NAM001]

I totally understand and I am completely sympathetic to what you write. However, I disagree strenuously on the following grounds:

I was trained to (and serve) CGA standards, not PSI's. Note that CGA offers exemptions and modified re-test procedures. I consider CGA to be most reasonable in that they are clearly taking both sides into consideration. If a tank is in violation of those standards, then don't bring it to me. I will condemn it out of concern for those who would fill it and those who would wear it. This is the fundamental basis of self-regulation. We (all of recreational scuba) police ourselves to reasonable and reproducible standards so that the government can give us the blind eye on this issue. Why give me the power to 'Condemn' if you can just keep shopping it out to other re-testers until you find one who will pass it?

Would you prefer that US civil and criminal law set forth and enforce the use of pressurized recreational cylinders?

A re-tester who chooses to condemn a tank that they are unsure of is the problem. They are paid professionals who are charged with making those close calls. We all have a list of what will kill a cylinder. If it squeaks by, so be it. It is not your right as a re-tester to call everything 'foul' just to cover your a$$.

1st Because that is what the law requires. Your view / perspective has already failed in court. Again you are acting per your certifying agency's opinion.
2nd You also have the problem of condemning if unsure by over zelous inspectors. The customer does not forfiet the right to a second opinion when it comes to VIS. It is not the same thing as a HYDRO. Those that have wrongfully condemned tanks, have been been sued, and have had to replace them for the customer. Then again that is the position of the legal team and case revuiews used for the PSI folks. I know you consider CGA to be the most reasonable. And yet I think in the CFR's some tanks can not be VIS's by other than PSI certified inspectors because they are the only ones recognized to be in full compliance in their methods and training. At some point that will change but for now PSI is the bible when it comes to bringing together all regs and policies that exist on the subject. It is all together possible to be in compliance with DOT, CGA or a manufacturer and not be in compliance with the CFR's.

 

[lowviz]

you are acting per your certifying agency's opinion.

That is correct. But, having an open mind, I am most willing to alter my behavior.

-Proof that it is illegal for me to condemn a tank/cylinder?