Leniency to violators by authorities

Every day, we see reports of many accidents, incidents, violations by factories. There will be hue and cry for lenient attitude / laxity on the part of the regulating authorities. There will be injuries/fatalities/release of fumes, gases from plant to public domain/dumping of chemicals in the night in public areas/failure of containment from tankers, etc. Immediately, regulators are found fault for not keeping eye on violators. Regulators also visit the affected areas, factories and say that there is no licence for operation or matter is under investigation or notices are slapped, etc. The issue will be left. Media also will leave it as the importance is lost after the item is aired in all channels.
This is not happening in our country alone. When we see reports appearing in several websites of different countries, we come to know that this is worldwide phenomenon. Even, in countries where regulators are tough nuts, stiff penalties are imposed, still accidents/incidents/violations continue to occur and reasons seem to be silly. Though, many do not agree now-a-days that 'safety is nothing but common sense', still that common sense alone can prevent many accidents.
We are all greed and want to save few bucks by following short cuts. Finally, after sometime, everybody would have experienced a huge loss because of one accident and the loss far exceeds all savings accrued so far from short cut methods. Still, the lessons are confined to the affected individual alone and again the same individual will bypass safety after sometime, because our memory is short.
In such a situation, what a regulator can do is the big question, when we do not have self discipline. Then, we have to face the consequences and suffer.

No accidents implies everything safe or something is wrong?

No accidents – Whether everything is in control or something is not identified?


It is reported that the BP’s Deepwater Horizon rig explosion (11 deaths, 115 survivors) caused by escape of gas and oil from the well dug was preceded by seven years of work without any injury. The drilling was done and the well is to be closed. Another rig will takeover for production from the well. While BP managers assembled to congratulate the team for working without any injury, the pressurized gas gushed from the 5 km deep well and exploded.

The incident is not without early warning signs. The rubber gasket (seal to close the drill pipe tightly and shut the well) of the blowout preventer (BOP) located near the seabed, for the well got ruptured in an incident and rubber pieces were found in the mud used for holding the gas and oil within the well. A crewman accidentally forced the drill pipe by 15 ft through the BOP. But, engineers failed to analyse the cause for the presence of these rubber pieces. This shows that every major accident is preceded by a number of near misses and minor accidents. We should be able to identify, report and analyze all near misses and minor incidents however negligible they are. It appears there is pressure on the crew to complete the drilling work fast as they are already behind the schedule. This might have caused the crew to do away with the repair of critical safety systems too.

Further, the backup control system called ‘pod’ for BOP lost some of its functions. This reminds us of Murphy’s law.

The emergency drill carried out every Sunday to escape after head count was not followed after the accident. People started leaving in the available lifeboats without looking for others on the rig. This shows that whatever drills we do will go haywire and those in possession of escape vehicles will disappear instead of carrying the persons for which vehicles are intended.

It appears that safety is ignored because of the short term profits seen by the management compared to possible losses that may accrue to the organization when run without safety systems in place. The management that is responsible for allowing safety violations may not be there as they may take bonuses and leave. Once a system is violated and is in place for sometime, this wrong practice itself becomes an established system and will be considered normal. This has happened in Bhopal accident. All safety systems for MIC tanks were removed to save running costs. As there were no incidents, the management thought that they have done a wonderful job and reduced operating costs. May be, they are under pressure to show profits so that investors will be happy. Accidents do take place because public memory is short. They may be losers only for a short term and reaping increased valuation of their shares. Those affected because of the accident are limited in number and their voice is lost in the herd (of investors).

Normally when people are happy having achieved certain safety record, it will be followed with a major accident. There is no accident because we are lucky till the accident occurs. We are overconfident of our performance. We ignore the warning signals saying that everything is under control. We venture out to do something adventurous. Those who protest about violations are treated as ‘nuts’ and ‘pessimistic’. They may questioned about their integrity, commitment and chided for accepting bonuses or rise in salaries when systems are wrong as pointed out by the same persons. These persons will be blamed in all respected for pointing the violations forcing them to leave or they will be fired.

When accident occurs, people will conveniently forget everything though cautioned by few and term it as ‘one of those rare accidents which no one expected’.

Safety violations are found, then why the plants are allowed to run?

In an article at http://www.safetyxchange.org/, I read that there were more than 700 violations of safety, operation and environment found by OSHA, EPA and other regulating agencies. It was questioned about the compulsions or need for allowing the unit to operate though so many violations were found before the spillage itself. Many times, regulators identify violations and give time to rectify or pay penalty later for continued violations. Only a few times, unit operations were suspended or stopped. This creates a lenient attitude by managements that outweigh profits over the loss of production suffered because of suspension of unit operations to carryout works for rectifying the violations. After some accident / incident occurs, we repent for not doing the right thing before the event. This like applying the balm after burning rather than avoiding the burns itself.

If plant operations are stopped after allowing some time to correct, then everybody will fall in line and though it looks difficult to achieve safety discipline and people are scared of immediate losses, long term benefits will outweigh these losses and every one will follow the directions of regulators. Or they will not give chance for regulators to find safety violations and a system of identification and rectification will be established by the organizations themselves.