IMCASF - Apr 16
IMCASF - Apr 16
IMCASF - Apr 16
These flashes summarise key safety matters and incidents, allowing wider dissemination of lessons learnt from them. The information below has been
provided in good faith by members and should be reviewed individually by recipients, who will determine its relevance to their own operations.
The effectiveness of the IMCA safety flash system depends on receiving reports from members in order to pass on information and avoid repeat incidents.
Please consider adding the IMCA secretariat ([email protected]) to your internal distribution list for safety alerts and/or manually submitting information
on specific incidents you consider may be relevant. All information will be anonymised or sanitised, as appropriate.
A number of other organisations issue safety flashes and similar documents which may be of interest to IMCA members. Where these are particularly relevant,
these may be summarised or highlighted here. Links to known relevant websites are provided at www.imca-int.com/links Additional links should be submitted
to [email protected]
Any actions, lessons learnt, recommendations and suggestions in IMCA safety flashes are generated by the submitting organisation. IMCA safety flashes
provide, in good faith, safety information for the benefit of members and do not necessarily constitute IMCA guidance, nor represent the official view of the
Association or its members.
Summary
The five incidents in this safety flash cover a fatality from a release of stored pressure, two finger injuries, and two
cases of dropped objects – only one of which was a near miss. In all five cases, weak safety culture lay at the heart
of the incident, most particularly, failure to appropriately identify, and then control, risk.
Members may wish to refer to the following incidents (search words: stored)
IMCA SF 14/14 – Incident 1 – High potential stored energy incident: inner buoyancy module clamp failure during
removal
A toolbox talk was conducted before starting the job by the second engineer and crew, who were using appropriate
personal protective equipment (PPE) for the task. As per the plan, the trainee wiper was to hold the safety rope
and lower the pipe as instructed and the 4th engineer would align the pipe to pass through the opening. A fitter
was stationed at the lower end on the deck below. After the flanges were disconnected and while lowering the
pipe, the trainee wiper’s hand slipped from the rope causing sudden drop of the pipe, jamming the fitter’s left hand
little finger between the motor and the lower flange of the pipe. This caused a severe crush injury with a deep
laceration. The fitter was declared unfit for duty and was signed off.
The pipe and the opening through which it had to be The pipe seen from the lower deck – where the fitter
lowered. Two helpers were at this location. This was was working
one deck above the fitter’s location
The finger got crushed between the lower end of the pipe and the motor
Crushed fingers are a depressingly common occurrence even today in IMCA member operations. Any number of
them can be found amongst the safety flashes of the last 10 years. Members may wish to refer to the following
incident (search word: crush):
IMCA SF 04/16 – Incident 4 – Finger injury during maintenance work –restricted work case.
Members should also be aware that IMCA has a pocket safety card on this topic:
IMCA SPC 08 – Watch your hands – you’ve only got one set.
An investigation by the UK HSE into the incident, which occurred in 2012, found that even though the company had
identified the risks, there was still inadequate guarding of the machinery.
Members may wish to review the following similar incidents (search words: finger, guard):
IMCA SF 09/07 – Incident 1 – Pinch points on winches – hand safety;
IMCA SF 11/12 – Incident 1 – LTI: hand injury [using an improperly guarded vertical band saw].
Members may also wish to review the following safety poster;
IMCA SPP11 – Hand safety
The torque tool had various items retrofitted to it by the supplier, including a protection frame and two 25mm
lifting eyebolts. The eyebolts were poorly located, impacting heavily on the component parts and only one was
certified for lifting. The tool was provided to the vessel without rigging or guidance as to how it should be lifted.
The lift was incorrectly categorised as ‘straightforward’. It was covered under the generic toolbox talk and no lift
plan was created. The rigging arrangement decided upon was a ‘basket hitch lift’ using a 1Te webbing sling which
was ‘snaked’ through the uncertified protection frame. This rigging arrangement was not communicated to the
diver, who assumed the webbing sling was choked on itself. He re-applied the sling using a single lifting eye only.
On recovery, as the torque tool cleared the ‘splash zone’, the webbing sling released and the tool fell back into the
water. A ‘freefall’ of the tool was only prevented by the attached hydraulic hoses, through which the tool was
successfully recovered to deck.
Tool rigged in
basket hitch 1Te sling used
‘parallel mode’ for deployment
and recovery
Protection
frame
Members may wish to refer to the following incidents (search words: subsea, lifting, near miss, cone):
IMCA SF 12/11 – Incident 4 – Near miss: diver working under suspended load.
Please also consult IMCA SEL 019 – Guidelines for lifting operations.