Nitrox "sign-out" sheet for tank fills at LDS

[piikki]

If you kill yourself, especially if you kill yourself below the MOD, they have proof that you were aware of the contents of your tank and what the limitation was.

I know this has been beaten to death in more than one thread already but obviously my lazy self is not letting go. We had one of the local shops require that everyone PERSONALLY come pick up and sign their tanks. This meant that even when they knew that spouses, family members and buddies came to pick up tanks for each other it was no good. They could not analyze for each other even when the shop knew or had even themselves EAN-certified all the divers in question (and very well knew all were proficient in analyzing and marking the tanks - and even people with decent heads on their shoulders). However, it was OK for eg spouses to analyze the tanks for each other while both were at the shop while one was just bull****ting with the staff and not even looking over the process/verifying.

I found this ridiculous and went kind of hard at it to get it changed. It is quite an inconvenience we can't pick tanks for each other if they have EAN in them, esp if we are well-known to the shop. This is all the more ridiculous when the shop only controlled this for divers whose tanks they knew. Other divers could be picking up and distributing 20 EAN tanks to whoever they pleased after analyzing them. There is no proof there other than the person who picked them up knew the analysis process. Diving the tank is altogether another matter.

 

[peterbj7]

One of the benefits of living in the most litigious society on earth! Ironic really as the USA likes to trumpet itself as "the land of the free". You're more hamstrung than most of the rest of us!

 

[nwgarne]

My LDS has premix 32/36/40. They do not keep a logbook but you will not get out the door w/o analyzing your contents and marking the cylinder.

ditto

 

[Herk_Man]

In Bonaire, at BDA they have a Nitrox log. My family and I would frequently check out tanks, fill out the log, then check out tanks the next day and fill out the log again... directly below our log entries from the previous day. Seems we are the only ones that listened in class about why the logs are important.

 

[Turbosab]

We require the logbook. You sign out mix, mod, and sign off. I do it, so that if someone exceeds mod, and there is an accident, I cannot be pointed at as having given gas that he did not know depth for. It is all to cover my backside.
I even fill out the logbook for my own dives. All of our tanks are numbered so we know what was filled and who took it.

Just noticed your post...and the "Stupid should be painful" tag. TOTALLY with you on that one! Cheers, Sabrina from Vancouver

 

[DevonDiver]

I don't think there is any level of experience that can be reached where the basic safety protocols no longer apply.

When divers become to arrogant and/or complacent to analyise and log their fills.... they've probably become complacent about a lot of other things. Rather than being more safe, they are probably becoming the least safe divers in the ocean.

 

[D_B]

I just picked up my tank at the LDS after dropping it off yesterday, when I dropped it off to be filled I had to fill out a logbook with my nitrox cert # and name, there was a place for me to sign it and state what O2% was .. but after picking up my tank the next day and analizing the contents, I forgot to fill it in ..so I dont know where that puts me in the poll
.. They only carry banked 32% , they just started reselling nitrox after not doing so for many years (funnily, they are the shop pictured in the PADI nitrox book)

 

[lamont]

We fall into the 'OCD' category. As far as the owner is concerned it is a liability issue. If someone goes out and hoses themselves by exceeding depths, he can demonstrate that they knew those depths when they picked up the tank.

Anyone out there an actual personal injury lawyer than can comment on this logic?

I can see where this practice could establish some implied duty by the dive shop to be policing mixes, and could lead to unintended legal consequences.

At work, I'm in the camp who listens to the lawyers who tell us that we shouldn't be attempting to police what our users surf on the web. If we establish that we police web surfing behavior, then if someone is surfing porn on the web -- and we have 'allowed' them to do that -- and someone else walks in on them we could be legally exposed through our lax enforcement of policy. On the other hand if the employees simply have a duty to report to HR any observed behavior like that, then as long as HR deals with the problem correctly and efficiently the exposure to the company is minimal.

It seems like there could be a similar problem here in that by going further you could sign yourself up for more legal duty, and actually legally expose yourself more. By firmly keeping it in the divers responsibility to analyze their mix, dive it appropriately and sign their life away with a waiver, you may actually have less legal exposure.