Air Quality Certificate

I am aware of biannual CSA testing required for air fill stations?

  • And always ask to see a certificate every 6 months

    Votes: 6 23.1%
  • Sometimes ask

    Votes: 3 11.5%
  • Never ask

    Votes: 11 42.3%
  • What is an air certificate?

    Votes: 6 23.1%

  • Total voters
    26
  • Poll closed .

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

Yup James,

I did reread the post and well......yup I ranted and raved and completely missed the point.

I'm not an idiot though..... try to be nicer eh?

Sorry.....nose out.


I'll just keep bugging Divereh.

Hey.... there's no smilies for "stunned arse"
 
SneakyB'tard once bubbled...

What air standard do Commerical divers adhere to if it isn't the standards covered in the Occupational Health and Safety Act?

CAN CSA-Z275.2-92 as opposed to CAN CSA Z180.1



http://www.csa-intl.org/onlinestore/GetCatalogItemDetails.asp?mat=000000000002413268

Dude,
Thanks for the pm. I do appreciate your efforts. Your buddy pufferfish is off diving. I am sure he will wade into this upon his return.
Please keep in mind we are not trying to grind an axe with you. You have asked for our interest and support. This can only be done based on an informed decision.

Thanks again for looking into our second question.

safe dives
James
 
SneakyB'tard, Just some research for you

CFAO 50-10 para 14 states that: DND clubs shall forward a sample of compressed air used by the club to DCIEM.

CFAO 50-10 para states: In the event of a fatal accident, all
equipment shall be quarantined and forwarded to DCIEM.

CFAO 50-10 paras 25 & 26 makes reference to: An air sample of any air remaining in the cylinder must be sent for analysis if the incident so dictates

You forgot B-GG-380-000/ FP-002, which mentions DCIEM is that authority

CFAO 43-02 para 34 mentions High state of physical fitness and physical skills. This would be along the same lines of GUE's principles.

You forgot CFAO 34-53 para 7 subpara b: CSA Std CAN3-Z180.1-M85

All these tests are done by DCIEM which actually sets the standard.

Looks like we have to shut down the Military compressors, Military Club Compressors as they do not use an accredited lab either.

http://www.forces.gc.ca/admfincs/subjects/cfao/043-02_e.asp

http://www.forces.gc.ca/admfincs/subjects/cfao/050-10_e.asp

http://www.forces.gc.ca/admfincs/subjects/cfao/034-53_e.asp

Just had to look up the CFAO you quoted, it's my job at work. There is also a couple of ammendments that state there will be an updated to the z180.1 standard which I can't find. Circa Oct 2000, message was released in 1999.

Tom R
:eek:ut:
 
I agree with you.

But as I stated I do not know if the DND falls under the requirements to meet the SCC ( a civilian agency)

CFAOs applies to members of the Canadian Forces and any activity governed by the DND. Club dives,Adventure training etc.

Unless you get your air and do your dives in a CF Club or are a CF member doing a dive on the job.... those CFAO's don't apply to you.
 
I'm confused, It's OK for CF Clubs to use unaccredited air also. So exemptions for Dan's and CF Clubs now.

JB
 
Jimmy B once bubbled...
I'm confused, It's OK for CF Clubs to use unaccredited air also. So exemptions for Dan's and CF Clubs now.

JB
You guys should stop pulling sneakys pin. You all know better. DCIEM has been renamed Defence R&D Canada and they have been sending their samples to Maxxam and Seatech for quiete some time and therefore the air samples are done by an accredited lab.
 
James Pate once bubbled...


The issue is that we want to see the documentation that stipulates only certain accredited facilities may test to the standard.
Hi James, you have very valid questions. CSA Z-180.1-00 specifies the use of an accredited lab. The requirement is in the standard itself.

James Pate once bubbled...

Finally, we are not discussing commercial diving, which adheres to a standard other then Z180 in Canada.
You are correct. CAN/CSA-Z275.2-92 (reaffirmed 1999) is the National Standard of Canada for Occupational Safety Code for Diving Operations.

The OUC has a GC, which is a good thing but to test for what is in the standard they would require a methanizer that they do not have. If you look at any of the "labs" sample cylinders there is a filter media to trap particulate matter and hydrocarbons. The OUC has no such test cylinders. There is no way that you could use their air test results to know that you can conduct any blending of enriched gases.
 
Bubble Boy once bubbled...

Hi James, you have very valid questions. CSA Z-180.1-00 specifies the use of an accredited lab. The requirement is in the standard itself.
We are well aware of the requirement being in the standard, (that the use of an accredited lab. )
I cannot understand why you folks are completely missing my request. It is starting to look like aviodance with each passing post.

the request
Please present us with the documentation which details/defines what an accredited lab is.



The OUC has a GC, which is a good thing but to test for what is in the standard they would require a methanizer that they do not have. If you look at any of the "labs" sample cylinders there is a filter media to trap particulate matter and hydrocarbons. The OUC has no such test cylinders. There is no way that you could use their air test results to know that you can conduct any blending of enriched gases.

Would you please explain what a GC is. I appreciate the additional information. We are looking into it.

James
 
Criteria and Procedures for Accreditation

Accreditation Documentation

Program for the Accreditation of Laboratories - Canada (PALCAN)

http://www.scc.ca/publicat/canp/d92_6_e.pdf

This link will answer your request.

PALCAN Handbook–- D92.6
December 2001
iv
What is “Accreditation”?
The accreditation of a laboratory within the PALCAN program is a formal agreement
between the Standards Council of Canada and the accredited laboratory. This agreement
covers three specific aspects:
a. The Standards Council of Canada formally recognises the ability of the laboratory
to produce competent results for the specific tests or calibrations that are listed on
its Scope of Accreditation. A list of accredited laboratories and their scopes of
accreditation is available to the public on SCC web site at http://www.scc.ca.
Accredited laboratories are deemed to have all of the following in order to
produce competent results:
(i) Technically competent staff with the requisite skills and knowledge;
(ii) The environment with the requisite facilities and equipment;
(iii) The requisite procedures, and
(iv) The requisite quality control.
b. The Standards Council of Canada formally recognises the establishment and
maintenance of a quality system in the accredited laboratory which conforms to
CAN-P-4D (ISO/IEC 17025) General requirements for the competence of testing
and calibration laboratories. In accordance with Clause 2 of ILAC “Guidance
for Accreditation to ISO/IEC 17025”, the Standards Council of Canada also
formally recognises that the accredited laboratory’s quality management system
meets the requirements of ISO 9001:1994 and ISO 9002:1994 under the following
conditions:
(i) ISO 9001:1994, when the laboratory engages in the design/development of
new methods and/or develops test programmes combining standard and
non-standard test and calibration methods; and
(ii) ISO 9002:1994, when the laboratory only uses standard methods.
c. The accredited laboratory formally agrees to comply with the specific program
requirements set out in this PALCAN Handbook and agrees to pay all fees
associated with accreditation.


What is an “Accreditable Laboratory”?

In addition to meeting the SCC requirements (CAN-P-4) and conditions in the PALCAN
Handbook (D92.6), an applicant that is an Accreditable Laboratory must have the
following salient standard features:
PALCAN HANDBOOK D92.6
• Located at a single site;
• Management by a suitably qualified professional authorised to approve and
sign its test reports or calibration certificates;
• A scope of testing or measurement capabilities, that can be satisfactorily
assessed by an agreed maximum number of four technical assessors, a Task
Group Laboratory member if necessary, and a team leader;
• Legal identifiability per clause 4.1.1 of CAN-P-4; as fully explained in the text
below, this means that the SCC accreditation covers a distinct corporate entity
and is limited to that entity within clear and distinguishable corporate
boundaries; and
• Where the laboratory conducts testing and/or measurements in more than one
product area or operates in different fields of testing or measurement, it must
be subject to one quality management system.
Disclaimer
Accreditation under CAN-P-4 is a demonstration of confidence in the laboratory’s
technical competence. It is not an assurance. It does not imply the acceptance by the SCC
of any responsibility toward any person or organisation for the effects of the services
provided by an accredited laboratory.
 
Man, oh man. Sneaky and Puffer you sure can play dodge ball with professional ease. I can see what SisterJ's frustration is in trying to reason with you two.

Lets see if we can clarify a couple of things and award some scores.

1. CFAO's cover the military not civilians - Jimmy B out CFAO's them hands down - 1 pt.

2. Mininstry of labor covers commercial diving not recreational. Beat to death - 1 pt SisterJ.

3. Puffer and Sneaky have only a few stations in Ontario where they can get air. Thats good it leaves more for us. Sneaky and Puffer 1 pt.

Lets make is real simple. Most of science uses statisical analysis. Now for those of you who are not familiar with statistics when we state a hypothesis we state the general and then look for a counter example to disprove it. In this case we would state "That all the air in Ontario being pumped by dive shops conform to the Z180-1 00 standard". Then we would go about disproving that. Not easy to do when you think about is. Not being tested does not mean that is does not conform. Of course the test confirms or denys.

So if we apply this to OUC testing I would state "the air testing that the OUC conducts is to the Z180-1 00 standard and their testing is valid". I challenge Puffer and Sneaky to find the counter example. So me one documented case of an OUC tested sample that has failed to meet the Z180-1 00 standard or leave get out of Dodge. No should of's, or I think's, or I feel's. As Sister J said don't hold back here, roll out the reams of documentation of a failed OUC test. Simple question, simple problem.

As well I would like to have one, just one, documented case of a fatality caused by bad air here in good ol'e Ontario rather than your useless diatribe on well it could da been ya know but the air wasn't tested or this or that. The fact of the matter is there is not one case of a recreational diver dying due to bad air, end of story.

You folks are sure long on verbosity but sadly lacking in facts. To recap:

Give me one example of a failed OUC test and on death due to bad air. Oh can't? I am not surprised.
 

Back
Top Bottom