[Interpretation of the Special Equipment Safety Law] Article 53

Thread Content

Article 53: Units that produce, operate, or use special equipment shall, in accordance with the requirements of safety technical specifications, provide special equipment-related information and the necessary conditions for inspection and testing to the special equipment inspection and testing agencies and their inspectors and testers, and be responsible for the accuracy of such information. Interpretation of the provision: This article deals with the regulations regarding the assurance of the quality of inspection and testing work. 1. Special equipment inspection and testing institutions shall issue inspection and testing reports in an objective, fair, and timely manner, and shall be responsible for the results of such inspections and tests as well as the conclusions drawn. Inspection and testing are related to the safe operation of special equipment; they involve a high degree of technical expertise, and the conclusions reached have certain legal validity. Therefore, its inspection, testing, and appraisal results must be objective and fair. Objectivity requires strict adherence to safety technical specifications, with meticulous inspection and testing of the site and special equipment on a item-by-item basis, to ensure that no inspections are missed or errors occur ； Fairness means conducting analyses and making judgments strictly in accordance with safety technical specifications as well as the actual results of inspections and tests, free from the influence of human factors. This includes ensuring that inspectors and testers carry out their duties impartially, draw practical judgments and conclusions, and do not issue reports that do not reflect the actual situation due to interference from local or corporate interests. The inspection conclusion for special equipment refers to the verification or diagnostic inspection conclusion issued after a supervised inspection or regular inspection of such equipment. It is generally expressed as meeting or not meeting, etc ； The inspection conclusions are primarily derived from the testing of special equipment; non-destructive testing involves detecting defects in welds, as well as surface and internal defects in the material properties of the base metal, so as to make judgments regarding the manufacturing quality of such equipment and the potential defects that may arise during operation. Appropriate testing techniques are used to support these inspection conclusions. At present, the system for inspecting and testing special equipment in our country is based on a unit-based responsibility structure; the primary responsibility for such inspections and tests lies with the inspection and testing agencies. However, in practice, it is each individual inspector or tester who is responsible for carrying out the actual inspections and tests. To ensure the quality of inspection and testing work, it is required that such organizations establish necessary quality management and responsibility systems for inspections. Inspection reports, as well as testing and appraisal reports, must be reviewed by relevant personnel within the inspection and testing agency. These reports or appraisal documents require signatures at three levels: from the reviewers, the inspection and testing personnel, and others as appropriate. For individual testing, inspection, and experimental reports and their conclusions, the personnel responsible for the testing/inspection/experiments and those who conduct the reviews must all sign, with each bearing their own responsibilities. The report or certification document submitted must bear the official seal of the inspection and testing agency in order to validate its validity. These requirements reflect the fact that the testing institutions mandated by the safety technical specifications are responsible for the authenticity, accuracy, and validity of the test conclusions they issue. II. When carrying out inspection and testing tasks, special equipment inspection and testing agencies shall promptly and accurately identify potential accident hazards and propose solutions to ensure that the production and use of special equipment meet safety requirements. During the supervision and inspection of the production process of special equipment, such agencies need to oversee the operation of the quality assurance systems in production units, the implementation of management systems, and the quality control throughout the manufacturing process; in effect, they assist the departments responsible for the safety supervision and management of special equipment in carrying out this oversight. During the supervision and inspection process, it is necessary to strictly enforce safety technical specifications, conduct thorough inspections and supervision of key stages, keep proper records, and carry out verification signatures in a timely manner wherever required by regulations. Since the supervision and inspection during production stages, particularly manufacturing, installation, modification, and major repairs, affect a company’s production progress and efficiency, failure to conduct such supervision and inspection in a timely manner will cause certain production activities to come to a halt until verification and confirmation are obtained before they can resume. For inspection items that require on-site verification, such as pressure tests for pressure-bearing equipment or the sealed structure of certain devices, it is necessary to arrive at the inspection site in advance to witness and confirm the inspection results ； On the other hand, any issues identified during the supervision and inspection process need to be reported to the production unit promptly. If the production unit is not promptly requested to address the identified issues, defects in certain special equipment with closed structures – namely those whose structure prevents inspection after manufacturing or installation – may remain hidden, posing a risk of accidents ； If processing is carried out after manufacturing or installation, modification, or repair, the equipment will have to be dismantled or damaged in order to eliminate the defects, which inevitably leads to certain economic losses or an extension of the project timeline. Under the current practice, for general issues, a feedback form can be used to inform the production unit to make timely improvements ； For serious issues, a notice requiring comments is issued, ordering the manufacturing unit to make immediate corrections; a copy of this notice is sent promptly to the local authorities responsible for supervising the safety of special equipment. For issues that are representative in nature, inspection cases are established and reported to the State Council or the provincial authorities in charge of supervising the safety of special equipment. The testing services provided by testing agencies during the production process constitute a form of quality control for that process; it is also necessary to be able to provide test results promptly and accurately, which serve as the basis for production units to issue certificates of product quality. Special equipment inspection and testing institutions conduct regular inspections of such equipment in order to identify defects promptly, provide recommendations for addressing them, ensure that these defects are resolved in a timely manner, and thus guarantee the safe operation of the special equipment. After the regular inspections are completed, the inspection and testing agencies must issue reports promptly to inform the user units; these reports must accurately indicate the existing defects as well as a conclusion regarding whether the equipment can continue to be used. In the case of defects that prevent continued use, the inspection agency must report to the local department responsible for the supervision and management of special equipment safety. The special equipment manufacturers and users who receive such reports must handle them carefully and formulate plans for rectification, repair, or replacement ； The local authorities responsible for the supervision and management of safety related to special equipment, upon receiving such reports, must require the relevant entities to conduct timely inspections and take action to address serious issues, potential accident hazards, or unsafe factors, in order to eliminate those risks. III. In order to strengthen the supervision and management of special equipment inspection and testing institutions, the departments responsible for the safety supervision of such equipment must establish a system for random inspections of the quality of their work, carrying out such inspections on a regular or irregular basis. At present, the General Administration for Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine requires that supervision and random inspections of special equipment inspection and testing institutions be conducted annually. By utilizing information obtained through random inspections of special equipment manufacturing units, reports from the public, and online comments, the work quality of inspection and testing agencies is assessed by tracing back to the manufacturing units. The department of the State Council responsible for the supervision and management of the safety of special equipment, as well as the provincial departments responsible for such supervision and management, may also, within the scope of their respective authorities, arrange systematic random inspections of special equipment inspection and testing agencies on an annual basis, at a certain proportion. The methods of random inspection mainly include random inspections, test reports, and records. It is also possible to conduct follow-up checks on the special equipment that has been inspected or tested, in order to determine whether the inspections and tests were conducted objectively and fairly, whether the results of the inspections and tests as well as the conclusions drawn are accurate, whether all necessary signing procedures have been completed, and whether reports and evaluation documents are issued in a timely manner. This helps to assess the management quality of the inspection and testing agencies. In order to standardize supervision and random inspection activities and ensure their objectivity and fairness, the General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine allocates a special budget each year for the random inspections carried out by institutions responsible for the inspection and testing of special equipment. The institutions being inspected are not notified in advance about these inspections, and the costs related to the travel, accommodation, and other expenses of the inspection team members are covered by the institution conducting the inspections; no fees are charged to the institutions being inspected. Spot checks should be arranged at appropriate times. If the higher-level authorities responsible for the supervision and management of special equipment have already scheduled such checks, then, unless there are special circumstances (such as receiving a report on the spot or detecting serious issues related to quality control), the lower-level authorities in charge of the supervision and management of special equipment generally do not arrange further spot checks.