1.

3 REMOVAL OF HAZARDS 17

bypassed and the leaking section plugged off (stoppled) while in use. The
job went well mechanically, but the leak continued. It was then found that
the leak was not coming from the steam line but from a hot condensate
line next to it. The condensate flashed as it leaked, and the leak looked
like a steam leak [26].

1.3 REMOVAL OF HAZARDS

Many accidents have occurred because equipment, though isolated

correctly, was not completely freed from hazardous materials or because
the pressure inside it was not completely blown off and the workers car-
rying out the repair were not made aware of this.

1.3.1 Equipment Not Gas Freed

It is usual to test for the presence of flammable gas or vapor with a
combustible gas detector before maintenance, especially welding or other
hot work, is allowed to start. The following incidents show what can
happen if these tests are not carried out or not carried out thoroughly.
Large pieces of equipment or those of complex shape should be tested in
several places, using detector heads at the ends of long leads if necessary
(see Section 5.4.2d).
(a) An explosion occurred in a 4,000-m3 underground storage tank
at Sheffield Gas Works, England, in October 1973. Six people were
killed, 29 injured, and the tank was destroyed. The tank top was
thrown into the air, turned over, and deposited upside down on the
bottom of the tank.
The tank had contained a light naphtha and had not been thor-
oughly cleaned before repairs started. It had been filled with water
and then emptied, but some naphtha remained in various nooks
and crannies. (It might, for example, have got into the hollow roof
supports through pinholes or cracks and then drained out when the
tank was emptied.) No tests were carried out with combustible gas
detectors.
It is believed that the vapor was ignited by welding near an open
vent. The body of the welder was found 30 m (100 ft) up on the top of
a neighboring gasholder, still holding a welding torch.
According to the incident report, there was no clear division of
responsibilities between the Gas Board and the contractor who
was carrying out the repairs. “Where, as in this case, a special risk
is likely to arise due to the nature of the work performed (and the
owner of the premises has special knowledge of it), the owner must