Archive for category: Featured

The EPA has published guidance material that will help all heavy vehicle operators and drivers, assisting in identifying issues that can lead to a vehicle fire. The document also provides guidance for drivers in the signs and what to look for, hopefully preventing a fire in a vehicle.

You can access this guidance material by clicking on the links below:
Preventing fires truck inspection manual

The EPA and truck fire investigators have come together to create the Preventing fires – truck inspection manual (PDF 4MB) for people such as fleet operators, workshop managers and mechanics to assist them in identifying potential causes of truck fires and to help prevent them from occurring.  The manual focuses on more than pre-journey checks and includes

Guidance for Drivers

Guidance for drivers (PDF 832 KB) to help them identify faults – such as overheating brakes and electrical faults that could lead to fires while in transit. This guidance also informs drivers about what to in the event of a fire starting.

Checklist for Mechanics

A checklist for mechanics (PDF 252 KB) to assist in vehicle inspections

—————————————————

The EPA advises that more than 200 trucks catch fire every year in NSW with many of these fires being preventable. These fires endanger lives, and can cause water, land and air pollution, significant traffic delays, and often result in the destruction of the truck and its cargo. The causes of many of these fires can be identified and prevented through regular inspection.

The EPA would like to see the manual in every workshop in the country so please share it with your mechanics and fleet managers – the message is “If you want to prevent your trucks catching fire, read this!”

More information and guidance about the requirements for safe and lawful transport of dangerous goods can be found on the EPA website.

SLP is happy to help the EPA share this great work.

SLP Team.

Australian SLP Inspection Location,

I bring to your attention a couple of issues that have been raised with us at SLP and we in turn are sharing this information as a way of raising your awareness to problems that can hopefully be avoided or lessened in the future.

Incident One:

Consecutive overfill protection probe activations on a tanker after repairs;

• Tanker overfill protection probe was activated before reaching the pre-set loading level and under SFL level during loading ULP.
• Tanker was inspected by third party maintenance contractor who tested/adjusted probe height and completed return to service paperwork.
• Tanker returned to site and the high level probe was again activated before reaching the pre-set loading level and under SFL level during loading ULP.
• Tanker was again inspected by third party maintenance contractor who tested/adjusted probe height and completed return to service paperwork.
• Tanker returned to site and the high level probe was activated for a third consecutive time before reaching the pre-set loading level and under SFL level during loading ULP.
• Tanker was inspected by third party maintenance contractor – it was then determined that the compartment had been incorrectly calibrated.

As an Inspection location how do you assure yourself that the tanker and its compartments are correctly calibrated, what information can you obtain for the manufacture or owner to assist you in making the correct call when you are requested to set an over protection probe hight?  In this case we are very lucky the overfill protection probe did its job and prevented the loading system from potentially overfilling the compartment leading to loss of containment and then on to worst case scenario of explosion/fire/injury or loss of life.

OS10 Road Tanker – Overfill Protection Standard

Incident Two:

Reoccurring Leak;

• Leak found on pipework from compartment to tanker manifold after loading at Terminal.
• Tanker inspected by third party maintenance contractor who repaired leak and returned tanker to service.
• Within 3 months the leak reoccurred after loading at Terminal.
• Tanker again inspected by third party maintenance contractor – repair was completed and tanker returned to service.

In this incident the repairers ability to adequately conduct quality repairs has been questioned? I must ask that at all times repairers understand the risk of cargo component failure and the seriousness of the potential outcome, I am not suggesting that in this incident that poor workmanship contributed to the second failure, but I do ask that you don’t let your repairs become a potential disaster due to poor quality work or a failure to fully investigate the reasoning behind the initial failure.

Please consider this information as an opportunity for learning and share with your staff .

Should you have any questions please don’t hesitate to contact me.

Lee Stringer SLP Manager

[email protected]