Diver’s worksite identification errors

  • Safety Flash
  • Published on 3 May 2017
  • Generated on 11 December 2024
  • IMCA SF 09/17
  • 3 minute read

A member reports continued worksite identification errors by divers.

What's happening?

The errors occur in spite of a significant reduction in such errors following improved engineering procedures and the application of operational good practice.

Mistakes are still being made, primarily when returning to the worksite after an initial correct identification.

Example 1:

During a recent dive, a Tronic connector was correctly identified by the diver on the panel with its corresponding jumper tail labelled back from the connector.

Positive confirmation was provided by the team in Dive Control. 

There followed an unsuccessful attempt to loosen and remove this connector with a C-spanner.

Initial attempt to remove correct Tronic unsuccessful

In order to provide more leverage, it was decided to try a strap wrench so the diver moved away from the worksite to collect this tool.

Crucially, the C-spanner was left on a different but adjacent connector and when the diver returned with the strap wrench he mistook this connector for the one previously identified.

The error went un-noticed and the diver removed and cleaned the wrong connector.

Incorrect Tronic removed and cleaned

The mistake was noticed while preparing to connect the jumper to the wrong port as the colours did not match. The job was immediately stopped and a “Time Out For Safety” held, before retracing the steps and continuing with the correct Tronic connector.

At no time was the diver or equipment at risk as the power was isolated.

Example 2:

Planned operations for removal of a section of pipework from a flange took two dives.

The section to be removed was correctly identified during Dive number 1, but after bell turnaround and the meal break, during Dive 2, the incorrect flange was identified and the wrong bolts were removed.

the Dive Supervisor called an “All Stop”, as it was identified that work was being conducted on the wrong flange

After several bolts had been removed, the Dive Supervisor called an “All Stop”, as it was identified that work was being conducted on the wrong flange. A “Time Out for Safety” was called to discuss actions already taken and to agree the further actions needed. At no time were the divers or equipment at risk as the Pipeline End Manifold was shut down.

Our member notes that both of these recent incidents have their own set of contributory factors such as inadequate handover between Dive Supervisors in the second example, but both events featured identical failings which were consistent with previous incidents.

Actions

  • Increase focus/attention in setting up for worksite identification.

  • Procedures and task plans should include steps to positively identify and mark the specific item to be worked on.

  • Dive Supervisors should ensure the specific item to be worked on is positively identified and appropriately marked for intervention.

  • Should the worksite be left, even momentarily, the item to be worked on should be reacquired and again positively identified before work resumes.

Members may wish to refer to the following incidents:

  • Dropped object fell from crane – Poor communication/lack of awareness/control of work

    • A job had to be left half-finished but this was not properly communicated or handed over – a causal factor was poor communication, particularly at shift handover.

  • First aid injury: Electric shock

    • The injured person mistakenly accessed the wrong transformer cabinet and got an electric shock. A lesson learnt identified was the importance of clear labelling and the ability of crew to differentiate between similar sets of co-located equipment.

Latest Safety Flashes:

LTI: Finger injury during emergency recovery of ROV

A worker suffered a serious finger injury when their finger was caught between a crane wire and the recovery hook on an ROV.

Read more
BSEE: recurring hand injuries from alternative cutting devices

The United States Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE) has published Safety Alert 487.

Read more
NTSB: Crane wire failure

The National Transportation Safety Board of the United States (NTSB) published "Safer Seas Digest 2023".

Read more
Hot work performed outside of Permit to Work (PTW) boundary limit

A near miss occurred when a third-party contractor working removed a trip hazard from the vessel main deck, using a cutting torch and grinding disc.

Read more
Vital safety information (height of vehicle) found incorrect

“Height of vehicle” information displayed on a truck, was found to be incorrect.

Read more

IMCA Safety Flashes summarise key safety matters and incidents, allowing lessons to be more easily learnt for the benefit of the entire offshore industry.

The effectiveness of the IMCA Safety Flash system depends on the industry sharing information and so avoiding repeat incidents. Incidents are classified according to IOGP's Life Saving Rules.

All information is anonymised or sanitised, as appropriate, and warnings for graphic content included where possible.

IMCA makes every effort to ensure both the accuracy and reliability of the information shared, but is not be liable for any guidance and/or recommendation and/or statement herein contained.

The information contained in this document does not fulfil or replace any individual's or Member's legal, regulatory or other duties or obligations in respect of their operations. Individuals and Members remain solely responsible for the safe, lawful and proper conduct of their operations.

Share your safety incidents with IMCA online. Sign-up to receive Safety Flashes straight to your email.