Posted By Bob Shillabeer
First of all can I ask what was the outcome of the first incident in terms of preventive actions. How could the same accident happen if you had fully investigated the cause of the first accident? Why was there the same (if they were the same) conclusions? Are you missing something here or perhaps not thinking in terms of what other locations may the original conditions have existed? Or is a case of the preventative measures in place being ignored?

Bob.

Posted By rees davies
Thanks, just for a bit of clarification, the offending article is found all over the area of works and is steam line tracing and cannot be permanently covered due to CUI(corrosion under insulation). The MS and RA take this into account as well as the use of PPE as a last resort as temporary insulation can be employed where pipes are identified. both FA's occured where the operative , fully conversant with the equipment and MS/RA had the SLT at face level whilst reaching past it. On the first occasion the MS/RA were re-iterated to the operative, TBT's to the rest of the work force. So I do feel that a safety rule/condition has been willingly bypassed on the second occasion. I have also spoken to the supervisor about his input to the job. Additionally the person involved has come up with a good solution that may take away the human element for spotting this hazard.