Menu

Health and Safety News

Occupational health and safety news and guidance

Three firms sentenced after man killed by rocketing gas cylinder

10-07-2013

Photo shows cylinder with missing valve

Three South East firms have been ordered to pay a total of £685,787.31 in fines and costs for serious safety breaches after a plumber died and six other workers were seriously injured by a barrage of flying gas cylinders.

Adam Johnston, 38, from Sutton, Surrey, was struck by one of 66 heavy cylinders as they rocketed at speeds of up to 170 mph after one toppled over, discharged high-pressure gas, collided with others and set off a frightening chain reaction.

Mr Johnston, who was working on a construction project in Mundells in Welwyn Garden City, Hertfordshire, was walking with a colleague when he was struck by one of the argonite gas cylinders as they were propelled alarmingly around the building. He suffered multiple injuries and died at the scene.

Several other workers, including electricians working in the argonite store room, suffered injuries and long term effects resulting from the trauma of that day.

A Health and Safety Executive (HSE) investigation into the incident, on 5 November 2008, found that Mr Johnston died as a result of a series of unsafe practices relating to the installation of fire suppression equipment at the new-build storage facility. 

Crown House Technologies Ltd. of Dartford, Kent, was principal contractor for the project and engaged Kidde Fire Protection Services Ltd., of Slough, Berkshire, to supply and install fire suppression equipment at the new facility under construction.  This work was carried out by Kidde Products Ltd., also from Slough.

In a prosecution brought by the HSE against all three companies for safety breaches, St Albans Crown Court (on 5 July 2013) heard that 80 cylinders, nearly two metres high and each weighing 142 kg,  were stored without their safety-critical protection caps and left without being properly secured in racks.

Other trades involved in the construction project were also working next to these potentially unstable cylinders, unaware of the deadly risks involved.

HSE found that one or more of these cylinders was de-stabilised and probably fell over, causing its unprotected valve to shear off near the cylinder neck. This released an uncontrolled jet of liquified argonite gas under high pressure [equivalent to some 300 bar] the force of which caused the cylinder to move, colliding with others. These, in turn, were also knocked over and sustained similar damage.

A chain reaction developed rapidly and for several minutes shocked and terrified workers desperately sought shelter as they endured a barrage of heavy cylinders rocketing around them. This continued until 66 of the 80 cylinders had been discharged.

Some of the cylinders travelled at estimated speeds of up to 170mph and developed sufficient energy to penetrate walls and ceiling voids, travelling into more remote parts of the building.

Mr Johnston, a father of two, who was employed by Crown House Technologies Ltd., was struck by one of the cylinders as it was propelled from the room. Six other workers sustained injuries. The building itself was severely damaged.  

Crown House Technologies Ltd. pleaded guilty at an earlier hearing to breaching Section 2 and 3(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 was fined £117,000 and ordered to pay costs of £119,393.65

Kidde Fire Protection Services Ltd. pleaded guilty at an earlier hearing to breaching Regulations 6 and 13(2) of the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007and was fined £165,000 and ordered to pay prosecution costs of £59,696.72.

Kidde Products Ltd., pleaded guilty at an earlier hearing to breaching Section 2 and Section 3(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 and was fined £165,000 and ordered to pay prosecution costs of £59,696.72.

The court was told that the three companies involved failed to recognise the significant risks involved in the project or to carry out an adequate risk assessment. The principal contractor and the main contractors failed to co-ordinate the scheduled work activities or to co-operate meaningfully in light of the risks. There had also been insufficient training and supervision.

Read more...

Go Back

Comment