China Emergency Management News: Why can't the hidden dangers identified by superiors be found at the grassroots level? Standard | Key | Hidden dangers
Recently, the author participated in a cross enforcement inspection of the industry and trade in a certain county. City level experts have identified many major accident hazards during the inspection, but the regulatory and law enforcement personnel of the county's emergency management bureau have been unable to identify these major accident hazards.
There are certainly many reasons for this phenomenon, one of which is that, as we go to the grassroots level, the assessment of hidden dangers depends more on the grasp of regulations and standards by regulatory and law enforcement personnel. A regulatory law enforcement officer asked, "How should we determine if there is severe dust accumulation?"? How to determine if it is an explosion-proof equipment? These are highly specialized knowledge that require long-term accumulation to become familiar with, master, and apply; Without professional testing equipment, some hidden dangers cannot be determined solely by the naked eye, and even cause controversy.
The phenomenon of "uncertainty" in risk investigation and treatment is not an isolated case. If these issues are not solved, it may allow some major accident hazards to "slip away" from under the nose. According to the requirements of the 2023 Action Plan for Special Investigation and Rectification of Major Accident Hazards nationwide, various regions and departments have added many criteria for determining major accident hazards. It is understood that a total of 37 standards and key inspection items related to major accident hazards in key industries and fields have been introduced in various regions, an increase of 68.2% compared to before the special action. However, in the specific implementation process, some regulatory and law enforcement personnel often hesitate to determine major accident hazards due to differences in production processes, equipment, experience, environment, etc.
Regarding this, some regulatory law enforcement personnel suggest that relying on experts to provide technical support and decision-making advice in law enforcement inspections is an effective approach. This can enable them to follow experts in law enforcement, learn, and accumulate knowledge, continuously improving their level of precision law enforcement. For example, when checking for dust explosion, wearing a strong flashlight can make you see very clearly, but experts suggest that strong flashlights should also be of dust explosion-proof type.
Therefore, the author thinks that regulatory law enforcement personnel should adapt to local conditions and apply knowledge flexibly in the law enforcement process, just like solving mathematical problems, where standard answers have already been given, and how to solve them needs to be studied by oneself. Multiple methods should be adopted to "verify" whether the hazard belongs to a major accident hazard. At the same time, various regions should also adopt substantive judgment standards rather than formal standards. Each department should carefully collect the difficulties and obstacles encountered by regulatory law enforcement personnel in determining major accident hazards, promote the standardization of major accident hazard determination, ensure the effectiveness of precise law enforcement, and thoroughly eliminate major accident hazards.