China News Service, Beijing, February 28 (Ren Jing) Recently, the Emergency Management Department announced a number of typical cases of punishing the principals of enterprises in accordance with the law, to promote the principals of enterprises to perform their duties and responsibilities according to law, and to fully implement the main responsibility for production safety. , and continuously improve the intrinsic safety level of enterprises.
Case 1
On September 16, 2021, when the Ministry of Emergency Management's Safety Law Enforcement and Industry and Trade Supervision Bureau, together with the Anhui Provincial Department of Emergency Management, conducted a law enforcement inspection on a steel company in Wuhu City through open and unannounced visits, it was found that Wang Mouhua, the company's main person in charge, existed. The following problems: 1. Failure to establish and improve the safety production responsibility system for all employees of the unit; 2. Failure to organize the formulation and implementation of safety production rules and regulations, operating procedures and education and training plans for the unit; 3. Failure to organize the establishment and implementation of safety risk classification The dual prevention working mechanism of management and control and hidden danger investigation and governance, and the main person in charge is not on duty for a long time, neglecting the safety management of the company.
The main person in charge of the company violated the provisions of Article 21 of the "Safety Production Law".
In accordance with the provisions of Article 94, paragraph 1, of the "Safety Production Law" and combined with discretion, the Fanchang District Emergency Management Bureau ordered the company's main person in charge Wang Mouhua to make corrections within a time limit, and made an administrative penalty decision of a fine of RMB 35,000.
Case 2
On September 23, 2021, when the law enforcement officers of the Emergency Management Bureau of Liaoyuan City, Jilin Province conducted a law enforcement inspection of an aluminum industry company in Jilin, they found that Jin Mounan, the main person in charge of the company, had the following problems: 1. Failure to establish and improve this 2. Failure to organize the formulation and implementation of safety production rules and regulations, operating procedures and education and training plans for the unit; 3. Failure to ensure the effective implementation of safety production investment in the unit; 4. Failure to organize the establishment and implementation of safety production The dual prevention work mechanism of risk classification management and control and hidden danger investigation and management has not carried out risk identification for some links such as high-temperature molten metal and deep well casting, and specified corresponding control measures; 5. The unit has not organized and implemented the production safety accident emergency rescue plan , and did not formulate on-site disposal plans and conduct drills in combination with the actual workshop and team.
The above behavior violates the provisions of Article 21 of the "Safety Production Law".
In accordance with the provisions of Article 94, Paragraph 1 of the "Safety Production Law" and combined with discretion, the Liaoyuan Emergency Management Bureau ordered the company's main person in charge Jin Mounan to make corrections within a time limit, and made an administrative penalty decision of a fine of RMB 50,000.
Case 3
On October 21, 2021, when the Safety Production Supervision Detachment of the Emergency Management Bureau of Huai'an City, Jiangsu Province and the law enforcement officers of the Emergency Management Bureau of Xuyi County conducted a law enforcement inspection on an optoelectronic technology Co., Ltd. in Huaian, it was found that Wan Mouhong, the main person in charge of the company, had the following problems : 1. Failure to establish, improve and implement the safety production responsibility system for all employees of the unit, and strengthen the standardization of safety production; 2. Failure to organize the formulation and implementation of safety production rules and operating procedures in the unit; 3. Failure to organize the formulation and implementation of safety production regulations for the unit Production education and training plan; 4. Failing to ensure the effective implementation of the unit's safety production investment; Failure to eliminate hidden dangers of production safety accidents in time; 6. Failure to organize the formulation and implementation of the unit's emergency rescue plan for production safety accidents.
The above behavior violates the provisions of Article 21 of the "Safety Production Law".
According to the provisions of Article 94, Paragraph 1 of the "Safety Production Law" and combined with discretion, the Huai'an Emergency Management Bureau ordered Wan Mouhong, the main person in charge of the company, to make corrections within a time limit, and made an administrative penalty decision of a fine of RMB 45,000.
Case 4
On September 6, 2021, the law enforcement officers of the Emergency Management Bureau of Mianyang City, Sichuan Province, together with experts, carried out the "Chuang'an 2021" special law enforcement action in Anzhou High-tech Zone. Production rules and regulations and operating procedures and production site inspections.
During the inspection process, it was found that Huang Mouye, the main person in charge of the company, had the following problems: 1. The safety production responsibility system for all employees was not established, and the safety production responsibility letter was not signed with the employees; 2. The safety rules and regulations of the unit were not formulated as required. The operating procedures and established systems are inconsistent with the actual situation of the unit, the operating procedures posted in the factory are not standardized, and there is no labor protection, risk identification and emergency response.
The above behavior violates the provisions of Article 21 of the "Safety Production Law".
In accordance with the provisions of Article 94, Paragraph 1 of the "Safety Production Law" and combined with discretion, the Mianyang Emergency Management Bureau ordered the company's main person in charge, Huang Mouye, to make corrections within a time limit, and made an administrative penalty decision of a fine of RMB 28,000.
Case 5
On September 28, 2021, when the law enforcement officers of the Linxia Prefecture Emergency Management Bureau of Gansu Province conducted a law enforcement inspection of an energy limited liability company in Gansu, they found that Zhang, the main person in charge of the company, had the following problems: 1. The safety of all employees of the enterprise was not established and improved Production responsibility system; 2. Failure to organize the formulation of enterprise safety production rules and regulations; 3. Failure to organize the formulation of safety production education and training plans; 4. Failure to organize the establishment and implementation of a dual prevention mechanism for safety risk classification control and hidden danger investigation and governance; 5. Failure to Organize the implementation of the unit's production safety accident emergency rescue plan, etc.
The above behavior violates the provisions of Article 21 of the "Safety Production Law".
In accordance with the provisions of Article 94, Paragraph 1 of the "Safety Production Law" and combined with discretion, the Linxia Emergency Management Bureau ordered the company's principal person Zhang to make corrections within a time limit, and made an administrative penalty decision of a fine of RMB 50,000.
Case 6
On September 7, 2021, when the law enforcement officers of the Baijitan District Emergency Management Bureau of Karamay City, Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region conducted a law enforcement inspection of an oilfield technology company in Karamay, they found that Xiong, the main person in charge of the company, had the following problems: 1. Not established Improve and implement the safety production responsibility system for all employees of the unit; 2. Not organize the formulation and implementation of the unit's safety production education and training plan; 3. Not organize the establishment and implementation of the dual prevention work mechanism for safety risk classification management and control and hidden danger investigation and management, and fail to supervise , Check the work safety of the unit, and eliminate the hidden dangers of production safety accidents in a timely manner; 4. Not organize the formulation and implementation of the unit's emergency rescue plan for production safety accidents.
The above behavior violates the provisions of Article 21 of the "Safety Production Law".
In accordance with the provisions of Article 94, paragraph 1 of the "Safety Production Law" and combined with discretion, the Baijiitan District Emergency Management Bureau ordered the company's main person in charge, Mr. Xiong, to make corrections within a time limit, and made an administrative penalty decision of a fine of RMB 40,000. .
The emergency management department stated that the main person in charge of the enterprise is fully responsible for the production and operation activities of the unit, and must also assume the responsibility of the first person responsible for the safety production of the unit.
It is necessary to conscientiously implement the policy of "safety first, prevention first, and comprehensive management", correctly handle the relationship between safety and development, safety and efficiency, and ensure that production must be safe, and production must not be unsafe.
(over)