Mailing List Archive Mailing List Archive
"If a dive shop owns their own cylinders and are renting them out to the public then they must follow the regs.(tanks clean, hydro every five years etc.)" No, the DOT regulations only apply to pressure vessels used in interstate commerce, the OSHA regulations do not apply to most dive shops (too small). Standard of practice in the community, however, does apply if and when you get to court and it dictates yearly visuals and five year hydros. Additionally, OSHA only has jurisdiction over the workplace, and then only a workplace of a certain size and above (I believe it is ten employees, but I really do not remember exactly, it might be eight or twelve). "Conducting business," has nothing to do with OSHA's jurisdiction. So: "1. You buy a tank of compressed He & a tank of O2 from a gas supplier, the gas supplier MUST comply whit OSHA regs." - MAYBE, depending on the size of the operation and whether there is an applicable OSHA reg. "2. I then take that gas home where I blend a 15/40 Tri-Mix for myself. I am NOT compelled to adhere to OSHA regs (no "business" was conducted)" - Right "3. My friend Phil comes over and I mix him a 15/40 Tri-Mix so that we can dive the same mix on our dive together. Because I like Phil (he lets me stay at his cabin several times a year) I don't charge him for the gases or my time to mix his gas. I am NOT compelled to adhere to OSHA regs (no "business" was conducted)." - Correct conclusion, wrong reason. "4. Frank gets his tanks filled with 15/40 so that he too can dive the same gas on our dive together. Frank is a Coast Guard licensed Capt. And runs the charter boat we will be diving from. In exchange for the boat ride I fill Frank' tanks. Business WAS conducted. I MUST COMPLY with OSHA regs." - Incorrect conclusion, wrong reason. "5 Bart is also diving with us But I don't owe Bart anything (he is Paul's friend but Paul is gone to Europe for six weeks and won't be there) I charge Bart for the gases used to mix his gas. Business WAS conducted. I MUST COMPLY with OSHA regs." - Incorrect conclusion, wrong reason. "Can you see the difference between each of these cases and why OSHA is involved in some but not others?" - I see the distinction that you're drawing, but none of OSHA's enabling legislation or regulations draws the same distinction. Do you need more help with this i.e. an explanation as to why Frank, Bart and the gas supplier were business deals and why my and Phil's fill were NOT? - On the basis of the US Tax Code I understand what you are saying, on the basis of DOT or OSHA it not correct. Phil Sharkey -- Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'. Send list subscription requests to `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'.
Navigate by Author:
[Previous]
[Next]
[Author Search Index]
Navigate by Subject:
[Previous]
[Next]
[Subject Search Index]
[Send Reply] [Send Message with New Topic]
[Search Selection] [Mailing List Home] [Home]