By Sue-Ann Wayow
LAND and Marine Construction Services (LMCS), the subcontractor hired to do works on Berth 6 belonging to Paria Fuel Trading Company, took all steps necessary to avoid a Delta-P situation in its conduct of the works.
This is according to LMCS’s owner Kazim Ali Sr who gave evidence at the Waterfront in Port of Spain con Monday before the Commission of Enquiry (CoE) charged with the investigation of the deaths of the four underwater divers in February, which included his own son, Kazim Ali Jr.
Ali told the CoE that because those steps were taken, there was no mention or discussion of the hazardous situation in the job scope.
Delta-P, a latent hazardous differential pressure condition was created by the methods used in the execution of the works with particular reference to the removal of fuel oil in Sea Line 36 where the incident occurred causing the divers to be sucked into the fatal pipeline, according to reports conducted by the Occupational Safety and Health Agency (OSHA).
Senior counsel to the CoE Ramesh Lawrence Maharaj referred to paragraph four of Ali’s witness statements which stated, “Everything being equal, I knew that once there was liquid in the riser directly under the plug then the horizontal section of the pipe should have been full and the riser at Berth 5 would had an ullage equivalent to that at the riser at Berth 6. Once this was achieved, there was no chance of any differential pressure.”
Paragraph 45 states, “We, therefore, did not discuss the possibility of a differential pressure in the method statement or the risk assessments because the steps we took should have eliminated this.”
Ali said the ullage at Berth 6 was measured using the naked eye and a tape.
Maharaj said, “You based that assessment on the basis that you assumed that the pipe, the underwater pipe was full.”
Ali replied, “Correct.”
Maharaj continued, “You recognise Mr Ali that there could have been a risk of a differential pressure if the underwater pipe was not full.”
Ali: “Correct.”
Maharaj: “But from what I saw in the documents nowhere in the risk assessment which was done for this job differential pressure was mentioned, Am I right? Am I correct?”
Ali: “Correct.”
Maharaj: “Nowhere in the scope of works I saw that, am I correct?”
Ali: “Correct.”
Maharaj, “Nowhere in the job safety analysis I saw that, am I correct?”
Ali: “Correct.”
Maharaj, “Nowhere in the notice to permit the work I saw that, am I correct?”
Ali, “Correct.”
Maharaj, “But you are telling us that you knew there was such a risk but you thought it was eliminated because you assumed that there was liquid content in the underwater piping.”
Ali: “Correct.”
Ali’s statements corresponded with witness statements from Christopher Boodram, the sole survivor of the tragedy who also said Delta-P was never discussed.
According to OSHA’s report, both Paria Trading Fuel Company and LMCS failed to recognise Delta P.
If recognised, a simple mitigation step and or change in the methods of work could have been instituted to eliminate this hazard, Maharaj stated in his opening remarks on the first day of the evidential hearing on November 22 as he read from evidence gathered from various persons and entities.
