Jump to content

derek

Administrators
  • Content Count

    2,476
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    54

derek last won the day on June 13 2018

derek had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

5 Neutral

1 Follower

About derek

  • Rank
    Posting Member
  • Birthday 03/01/1957

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://rmtdivingmembers.proboards.com/thread/309/read-before-applying-join

Profile Information

  • Location
    Southport UK

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Derek,

     

    this is the article when you get to the site.

    IMG_1578.thumb.PNG.2be62091f6a53cc363a033a299a73d9d.PNG

  2. derek

    New DCI Modelling

    Link to new DCI modelling http://www.news-medical.net/news/20170315/Researchers-create-new-model-for-predicting-severity-of-decompression-sickness-in-divers.aspx Scroll to the bottom of the page to download the document as well The link to the journal PLOS ONE article is below. http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0172665
  3. Version

    104 downloads

    Here it is for anyone Full list of diving contractors working or eligible to work in the UK. Before anyone asks, I don’t have, nor do I intend to undertake making up any lists for other countries either. This list is hard enough to keep track of with companies ceasing trading, dissolving, liquidating or going bankrupt. Anyone know of a UK company I have missed let me know. There were 6 companies that were listed previously which are listed as Active with company’s house. They have no web site but the phone number is active and I couldn't get any answer after several calls which leads to thinking they are not seriously plying for diving work. These are Aquatech Marine Ltd of Fort William Fort Subsea Limited of Methilhill Leven Fife P Brawn Diving & Engineering Services of Stromness Orkney Islands Rowen Welding and Underwater Construction Ltd of Newcastle Under Lyme Staffordshire Tobermory Shellfish & Diving Services of Isle of Mull Wester Ross Diving Services Ltd of Lochcarron Highland If you know they are still operating let me know and I’ll amend the list derek

    Free

  4. 3Rs

    Derek....Do you mind if I copy this too my face book page?

    kind Regards

    Richard

  5. Derek, I have been asked if and where CO2 limits are in IMCA documents, I cant find any reference at all, NORSOK does mention it, industry seems to follow the world wide TLV of 5000 ppm, (5mb) in chambers, Stolt used to go to 10 mb, and ceiling of 20 mb for bells.

    Apart from company manuals,mod you know if it is referenced in any industry guide notes.

    Cheers. Foggy.

  6. Thaks on the reference to divers keeping log books for two years, I was lookint in the ACOP and of course that particular bit isnt in it, thanks again.

    Foggy

  7. This is from the UK HSE Please find attached a paper covering the analysis of the consultation responses on the proposed changes to the 5 Diving Approved Codes of Practice (ACoPs). This details the results of the consultation process and the actions taken by HSE in response. Analysis attached I have attached all 5 ACoPs out of interest although I suspect the inland inshore and offshore ones are most relevant to this cause. The revised ACoPs are due to be published online in mid December and printed versions are likely to be available early next year. The main changes to the ACoPs will be discussed at the next meetings of the DIC/RDIC as well as at the appropriate industry working groups which I attend on behalf of the RMT Union. Derek Moore http://www.thediversassociation.com/index.php?/files/file/52-%7B?%7D/
  8. IMCA Free Document Downloads are here. http://www.imca-int.com/searchresults.aspx?division=diving&activeTab=documents#results The Divers Association International salutes IMCA for this major effort in promoting Diver Safety
  9. The outcome of the Russell Robinson Fatal Accident Enquiry was inconclusive as the judge could not identify the actual cause of death. Although this may be the case, there were a lot of other contributory factors which you will see from the attached I presented to the courts re the neck dam size and the bell size which the Judge did not consider were the cause of his death. The UK courts require that under law the cause of death has to be "beyond all reasonable doubt" and that could not be established. I suspect given the judge could not pinpoint any objective cause the UK HSE is unlikely to prosecute the company. What I was hoping for was the judge to implicate the bell size as a contributory factor in that it took a considerable time to recover the diver into the bell of 4.5 cu metres and get a seal before they could perform CPR. However the company still are liable under a duty of care to the employer under civil action where the term "balance of probability" is a less strict defence and having assisted the father and widow to find a suitable lawyer on a no win no fee basis, hopefully the widow and the daughter who was only 5 weeks at the time of Russell's death will receive suitable compensation for his loss. View attachment: Newspaper report into FAI Determination.pdf View attachment: Russell Robinson FAI Determination.pdf View attachment: FAI_Balmoral_bell_Russell_ Robinson.docx View attachment: FAI_PPE_Report_re_Russell_Robinson.docx
  10. Derek Moore one of the association members for union affairs, engaged the support of his local MEP Brian Simpson who became a supporter of the ‘Stop Commercial Diving Deaths Campaign’, to see if it was possible to raise the matter of diving safety to the EU commission. In the years of 2010 to 2012 inclusive there were 25 known accidental commercial diving deaths within the EC within the inland inshore diving community of which 24 were attributed to using SCUBA. In 1984 the European Diving Technology Committee (EDTC) completed work on its original guidance notes for safe diving practice and in May 1985 and the EC Commission held an International symposium on ‘Safety of Diving Operations’ with many eminent speakers from industry at the time. It was hoped following the symposium the EC would adopt a directive on safe diving practice, unfortunately this never materialised. While offshore mineral exploration and exploitation diving operations will attract the most prominence as it is perceived to be the most dangerous type of work, there is another larger sector of diving with regard to those who work underwater or in any other fluid in inshore coastal waters and inland in navigable waterways, canals, rivers, harbours, wharfs, docks, reservoirs, lakes, undertaking a variety and multitude of tasks who are equally at risk. In all EC national laws there is no legal requirement that prohibits the use of SCUBA in any of the operations inland or inshore or equally offshore, it may be deemed inappropriate equipment to use but it can still be legally used. Following a series of correspondence through his MEP Brian Simpson with various bodies within the EC Parliament and Commission, they advised Derek Moore that diving safety was adequately covered by the Framework Directive 89/391/EEC on Workplace Health and Safety and the PPE Directive 89/686/EEC. Derek Moore counted the arguments that Article 6, 13 & 15 of the Framework Directive were failing the commercial diving industry in that the employers and the employees were not taking into account the specific risks within commercial diving and were using inappropriate equipment for inland inshore commercial diving operations. The EC then suggested that EN standards of specific diving respiratory equipment be written up to which Derek Moore then pointed out to the EC commissioners that such standards already existed. But the EN standards only specified the minimum requirements and testing of such apparatus, the standards did not specify the conditions under which such equipment must not be used. Following the repeated discussions, the EC Commissioners invited Derek Moore to the Luxembourg to attend the ‘General Directorate on Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion’, ‘Health, Safety and Hygiene at Work Unit’ on the 6th March 2013 to present to the commission the reason for the failings in the diving industry and what options could be available to alleviate the number of deaths in the industry within the EC. Getting a slot to be able to address the EC commission is rare as an invited guestl, but following his continued legal and substantiated arguments the commissioners were concerned that the number of deaths in the industry was unacceptable and wanted to hear his views. In his presentation Derek Moore explained the nature and diversity of the diving industry, the working environment and the variety of works and hazards of working in the inland inshore industry. He explained the limitations of SCUBA equipment and the advantages of using umbilical supplied diving apparatus showing this by having demonstration equipment provided by Hughes Subsurface Engineering of Liverpool. http://www.hsse.co.uk He equally explained that SCUBA was an acceptable practice when used in certain sections of the diving community where the hazards were significantly lower such as those working in the: Scientific and Archaeological diving activities. Media diving activities which is underwater filming and photography. Recreational Diving Instructors who teach recreational divers to dive. Divers who harvest wild shellfish and other aquaculture from the seabed in open water, not commercial farms. Diving in benign conditions such as open top tanks, pools, zoos and aquaria. He then went onto explain that the specific duties and responsibilities varies from one EC country to another depending on national and local regulations, but the fact must be that all concerned with a diving operation whether as a diving contractor, employee, diver, diving supervisor, client, harbour master, vessel owner, government, equipment manufacturer etc etc , must all bear a measure of responsibility for a diving operations safe conduct. The specific duties and responsibilities of all involved in a diving operation he said will vary depending on the nature and duration of the diving operation and where and when it is being carried out. He concluded that if persons don’t know what their duties and responsibilities are which will include the persons hiring the diving contractors, then it follows that efficient and safe execution of the work underwater will certainly be impaired and safety of the operation may be prejudiced. In his opinion he told the audience that of the 24 deaths which were attributed to using SCUBA instead of using surface supplied equipment in the inland inshore sector of diving, of this number, 23 of the divers would be alive today and in the other death a professional diving contactor would have implemented procedures to prevent that death. In all the deaths were wholly preventable he claims. What was noticeable in all cases was that the tasks being performed were relativity simple underwater tasks expected to take only a short time and the employers and clients were putting cost first rather than safety. Finally he presented two options to the commission to look over. The first being a simple directive that for certain diving operations namely those working offshore and in the inland inshore diving community undertaking surface diving operations must use umbilical supplied diving equipment that meets EN 15333 Part 1 and/or 2 standards and prohibit the use of SCUA that meets EN 250 and 13949 standards. This he said would not prejudice any of the current national or local laws within EC states, but reinforce the requirement to preclude SCUBA from such operations. In his second option he presented the case to the Senior Labour Inspectors at the meeting (basically the HSC representatives of the EC states) that they carry out a modular campaign to inform not only the diving contractors of their duties under the EC framework directive on H&S in diving operations, but equally the clients and others of their responsibility to select an appropriate diving contractor to manage and conduct a safe diving operation and ensure the diving contractor use underwater respiratory equipment that was appropriate for the task. To assist the Labour inspectors he produced a document and simple information checklists to help inspectors if they were inspecting a diving operation. In reply the Commission members thanked him for an excellent presentation in explaining to them the issue of using inappropriate underwater respiratory equipment in specific diving works. They said a diving directive was not feasible as the current Framework Directive 89/391/EEC on Workplace Health and Safety and the PPE Directive 89/686/EEC were adequate to cover such operations underwater as they were general requirements. But they did admit that if the persons hiring the diving person or contractors were not aware of the hazards in the inland inshore diving sectors then it follows that they will not know which diving respiratory equipment is most suitable for that type of underwater work. Some commented that they had laws in place to protect diving workers and Derek agreed that certain EC states did have such laws, but none that he had read prevented the use of SCUBA in those diving operations. Another commissioner commented that perhaps the PPE directive should be amended to specify which underwater respiratory equipment should be used. Another commissioner pointed out that some deaths in his country were not listed and another 6 deaths should be added to the list bring the total deaths to 30 in 3 years. The UK commission representative pointed out the UK HSE has a specific web site that dealt with diving matters and that perhaps other commission members should look at this to see how the UK manages diving safety and all the information on the site was free to download. It was then mentioned that perhaps the EDTC should be the technical authority to take the issue further. It is now down to the EC commissioners to discuss the issue and decide the way forward in the matter of diving safety and Derek was asked if he would be prepared to assist if asked for advice. Time will now tell he says and we wait what action the EC Commissioners will take on the issue in their respective states. The wheels of politics though move slowly, as it took from April 2011 to March 2013 to present the issue to the EC commissioners. The commissioners may choose to do nothing, but as Derek Moore says, if his actions having drawn the issue to the forefront and in highlighting the issue have prevented just one death, they were worth the effort. Derek Moore would like to thank Hughes Subsurface Engineering of Liverpool in providing the display equipment for the presentation and Roger O’Kane of the UK Association of Diving Contractors for his assistance in some of the presentation work. http://www.hsse.co.uk http://www.adc-uk.info/website/home/home
  11. I have been making inroads into the EEC lot in Brussels in looking at diving safety within the EEC. Following a lot of correspondence through my MEP who is a supporter of the association there is to be a meeting of the Labour Inspectors' Committee working group MACHEX to be held on 6th and 7th March 2013. This working group exchanges information on the enforcement by the Labour Inspection of the Council Directive 2009/104/EC of 16 September 1989 concerning the minimum safety and health requirements for the use of work equipment by workers at work and therefore is best placed to discuss the issue of the most appropriate equipment for use in commercial diving operations. Given all the accidental deaths except 1within the EC in the last 6 years are by the use of SCUBA, the Committee will look at the requirement under Article 6 of the Framework Directive 89/391/EEC to evaluate and document all risks which could then be minimised by the selection of the correct appropriate equipment for use in such diving operations. The item for discussion is the use of the equipment that poses the main risk in commercial diving operations which is the use of “Open-circuit self-contained compressed air diving apparatus” (SCUBA) which complies with “EN 250:2000 or BS EN 13949:2003” instead of the correct use of “Open-circuit umbilical supplied compressed gas diving, Demand apparatus, or Free flow apparatus” that complies with “BS EN 15333-1:2008 or BS EN 15333-2:2009”. My MEP has sought approval to allow myself and another to address the meeting and explain in simple terms the safe benefits of using surface supplied equipment over SCUBA. A diving company has offered to provide the equipment for demonstration with a manequin to dress the gear in. Seeking an EC directive on diving safety cannot be approved by Brussels, so the thrust of the campaign is to seek the EC to discuss issuing a safety directive on the minimum standard of diving equipment in underwater diving operations that include the following. 1) any work taking place underwater in connection with the alteration, cleaning, construction, demolition, dismantling, erection, extension, installation, maintenance, removal, renewal or repair of, any building, edifice, structure, wall, canal, coast protection or defence, culvert, dam, dock, electronic communications apparatus, harbour works, drainage system, flood control, inland waterway, irrigation system, land drainage, river control, pipeline, power-lines, reservoir, sewers, water-mains, well, any buoy, any obstruction to navigation, any raft, any ship and wreck, commercial underwater farming in connection with the collection, harvesting or farming of fish, shellfish or aquatic plants from aquatic farms, mineral exploration & exploitation 2) any work taking place underwater which forms an integral part of any survey or any other underwater work carried out for the purpose of ascertaining if underwater works in section 1 are to be carried out. 3) any work taking place underwater which is associated with underwater archaeology or historical studies or any works taking place underwater which is associated with working in benign conditions when working within tanks, aquaria and swimming pools shall not apply to section 1 or 2 4) Underwater work within the meaning of sections 1 & 2 shall be required to supply PPE respiratory equipment that is to be used underwater, in accordance with Directive 89/656/EEC of 30th November 1989 and the Directive 89/686/EEC of 21st December 1989 5) the minimum equipment standard for use in sections 1 & 2 shall comply with, a) BS EN 15333-1:2008 Respiratory equipment, Open-circuit umbilical supplied compressed gas diving apparatus. Demand apparatus, or b ) BS EN 15333-2:2009 Respiratory equipment, Open-circuit umbilical supplied compressed gas diving apparatus. Free flow apparatus Although this will address the use of the appropriate equipment to be used in such operations it will not address the enforcement of the issue and that will be the responsibility of the member states through their organisations to implement. But I shall inform the insurance companies as they are few and far between for this industry of what the minimum equipment standards should be assuming Brussels approve such a move. That way the company will have to comply to meet the insurance requirements.
  12. I have said it before and as you may gather dealing with the EC parliament is slow. But progress is being made piece by piece. The letter attached shows where progress can be made and if you read the last paragraph it looks like I had better prepare a formal presentation so if you have any photos of commercial diving they would be useful send them to me. The EC parliament goes into recess for the summer soon and won’t convene till next September so I’ll have plenty of time and I’ll ask Brian Simpson to be present. Derek Moore View attachment: SIGNED VERSION.pdf
  13. If the instruction message I sent does not fully come through.

    Email me at diveratderek@aol.com

  14. Yesterday, 07:59 PM

    1. hey Derek,

    just curious if you could explain how to use the onboard gas calculator.

    cheers,

    Evan

    Look in column E below the matrix figures of Depth v Pressure, they are in grey boxes

    The matrix figures in the yellow and white boxes show only per cylinder the quantity of gas in minutes.

    If you work in cubic feet and PSI yo...

  15. Version

    479 downloads

    File imported by an administrator

    Free

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.