Core Viewpoint - The investigation report on the "6·9" explosion accident in Quanzhou, Nan'an, identifies it as a general production safety responsibility accident, resulting in 2 fatalities and 6 injuries, with direct economic losses amounting to 5.7858 million yuan [1][2]. Group 1: Accident Details - The explosion occurred during non-excavation horizontal directional drilling work at the power supply and distribution project of the Nan'an International Stone Industry Smart Park, leading to a gas pipeline rupture and subsequent explosion [1][2]. - The accident was attributed to multiple failures, including lack of safety responsibility among project participants, absence of survey data for design, and inadequate supervision and safety management on-site [2]. Group 2: Responsibility and Recommendations - The investigation suggested that four individuals, including the actual controller of Quanzhou Feifan Crossing Municipal Engineering Co., Ltd., bear direct responsibility and should face criminal charges for major responsibility accident crimes [3]. - Additional disciplinary actions were recommended for 19 public officials from Quanzhou Yixing Electric Power Engineering Construction Co., Ltd. and administrative penalties for three related companies and personnel [3].

转自：扬子晚报 2月2日，福建省应急管理厅网站发布《泉州南安"6·9"一般电力施工爆炸事故调查报告》。 经调查认定，泉州南安国际石材智慧产业园标准厂房项目（一期）供配电工程（开闭所新建工 程）"6·9"一般爆炸事故是一起因建设项目参建各方安全生产主体责任缺失，设计单位无勘察资料开展 建设工程设计，中标单位未履行招投标承诺，现场监督检查不到位，专业分包单位违法违规再分包，施 工现场安全管理缺失，施工单位无施工资质、未编制专项施工方案、无安全技术交底，违章野蛮施工， 现场作业人员在燃气泄漏扩散区域违规使用手机，建设单位履行工程建设安全管理职责不到位，未委托 工程监理，且不实行自我管理，燃气管道保护各相关方施工现场监护不到位，属地政府有关部门安全监 管不到位等问题而造成的一般生产安全责任事故。 事故发生 事故发生 后现场图 来源：智通财经 调查报告显示，2025年6月9日22：30许，泉州市南安市水头镇下店村南安国际石材智慧产业园标准厂房 项目（一期）供配电工程（开闭所新建工程），在非开挖水平定向钻作业过程中，回拖电力套管束发生 导向错孔，导致现场燃气管道破裂、泄漏，进而引发爆燃，造成2人死亡、6人受（烧）伤，一栋 ...

太旧高速改扩建项目工地坍塌事故原因公布。2026年1月26日，山西省阳泉市应急管理局公布《阳泉平 定山西路桥第五工程有限公司"3·17"较大坍塌事故调查报告》。2025年3月17日17时50分，山西路桥第 五工程有限公司施工建设的太旧高速公路改扩建工程聂家庄2#拌合站施工现场发生一起挡墙坍塌事故， 造成5人死亡。直接经济损失约823.11万元。 3月17日上午，项目劳务分包单位凯鼎源公司的法定代表人王某某1带领工人在施工工地现场支模板。17 时50分左右，凯鼎源公司工人王某某2在王某某1的安排下，驾驶装载机在事发挡墙墙背回填区碾压夯实 回填土（通过装载机在回填区行驶停靠并往返进行碾压夯实作业），车辆在回填区位置碾压夯实时（王 某某2在驾驶室目测距事发挡墙距离2米左右、装载机尾部距事发挡墙北侧通行坡道约8米处），回填土 侧压力增大、挡墙发生坍塌，3名技术员和2名工人被压埋致死。事故造成5人死亡。 事发时，王某某2驾驶自重16.9吨、整机宽度3.016米的徐工产LW500FV型装载机在碾压夯实作业时违规 行驶停靠在距坍塌挡墙外侧回填区不足2米的位置，违反《公路工程施工安全技术规范》（JTGF90- 2015）有关 ...

Group 1 - A poisoning accident occurred during the repair work of a water collection pit at the Wanxiang Tiandi project in Shantou, resulting in one death and one injury, with direct economic losses estimated at approximately 1.5 million yuan [2] - The accident was attributed to the violation of safety management regulations for confined space operations, where workers conducted dangerous work without proper safety measures, leading to toxic gas exposure [2][3] - The project, developed by Shantou Runxing Real Estate Development Co., Ltd., is a mixed-use urban complex that includes residential, commercial, and cultural components, covering around 100,000 square meters [5] Group 2 - The project was delivered for use in 2022, and the incident occurred in the basement of the third phase of the project [2] - The responsible personnel, including the project leader and a maintenance foreman, are facing potential legal consequences for their roles in the accident and for obstructing the investigation [3] - The investigation revealed that the workers' lack of safety awareness and improper rescue attempts contributed to the severity of the incident [2][3]

国 家 矿 山 安 全 监 察 局 宁 夏 局 网 站 公 布 了 《 宁 夏 宝 丰 能 源 集 团 股 份 有 限 公 司 马 莲 台 煤 矿" 2·17"一般爆破事故调查报告》。 2 0 25年2月17日2 2时16分，宁夏宝丰能源马莲台煤矿（以下简称"马莲台煤矿"）20907切 眼导硐掘进工作面发生一起一般爆破事故，造成11人受伤（其中9人重伤、2人轻伤）， 直接经济损失 5 6 3 . 8万元。 近日，国家矿山安全监察局宁夏局 网站公布了《 宁夏宝丰能源集团股份有限公司马莲台 煤矿" 2·17"一般爆破事故调查报告》。 事故原因与性质 （一）事故直接原因 1．违规裸露爆破 现场未实施打眼作业，爆破工将炸药卷直接放置在迎头浮煤堆里实施爆破 。现场视频显 示，事故发生前1 0分钟内，切眼导硐浮煤上炸药滑落，爆破工将部分炸药用脚向浮煤内踩 踏、部分炸药扔在浮煤上。 2．20907切眼导硐留有浮煤 自2月1 5日至2月17日早班共进行了5次爆破作业 ， 均未按照爆破说明书实现全断面一次 爆破成型 ， 留有1 . 8米底煤台阶。 3 .未采取综合防尘措施 事故当班辅助运输下山大巷供水管路维修，20907机巷及 ...

Core Viewpoint - The investigation report on the "10·27" poisoning and asphyxiation accident at Anhui Xintai New Materials Co., Ltd. reveals significant safety management failures leading to the incident, which resulted in four fatalities and direct economic losses of 6.0875 million yuan [1][8]. Accident Overview - The accident occurred on October 27, 2025, during the replacement of a brine tank in the public engineering workshop, where employees failed to follow safety protocols [1][3]. - The sequence of events leading to the accident involved multiple employees entering a confined space without proper safety measures, resulting in casualties [3][4]. Direct Causes - The direct cause of the accident was identified as an employee entering the brine tank without following confined space safety management regulations, leading to exposure to high concentrations of nitrogen gas [8]. - Rescue attempts were made without adequate personal protective equipment, exacerbating the situation [8]. Indirect Causes - The company exhibited poor safety management practices, including inadequate safety production responsibility systems and ineffective safety training [9]. - There was a lack of control over special operations, with workers violating regulations by entering the brine tank [9]. Recommendations for Accountability - Recommendations for handling responsible personnel include legal actions against the company's chairman, legal representative, and vice president, all of whom have been placed under judicial measures [12]. - The company itself is suggested to face penalties from the local emergency management bureau for its role in the accident [13]. - Issues related to local government and regulatory bodies have been forwarded to the provincial disciplinary committee for accountability [14].

Core Viewpoint - The investigation report on the poisoning and asphyxiation accident at Anhui Xintai New Materials Co., Ltd. reveals that the incident, which occurred on October 27, 2025, resulted in four fatalities and direct economic losses of 6.0875 million yuan, and is classified as a major production safety responsibility accident [2]. Accident Overview - The accident occurred during the replacement of the brine in the public engineering workshop's brine tank, initiated by the shift leader at 18:35 [3]. - The first shift completed the water drainage, and the second shift's operator entered the brine tank at 20:12, subsequently losing consciousness [4]. - Rescue attempts began shortly after, but multiple individuals also lost consciousness due to the hazardous environment [6]. Direct Causes - The direct cause of the accident was the violation of confined space safety management regulations by employee Zhang, who entered the brine tank without proper safety measures, leading to exposure to high concentrations of nitrogen gas [8]. Indirect Causes - The company exhibited poor safety management, with inadequate safety production responsibility systems and insufficient training, leading to violations of special operation regulations [9]. Recommendations for Responsible Personnel - It is suggested that the company’s workshop director, who died in the incident, be exempt from accountability due to his death, despite having direct management responsibility for the safety violations [10]. Legal Actions Against Company Executives - Three executives, including the chairman and general manager, have been subjected to compulsory measures by law enforcement, with recommendations for judicial processing based on their roles in the incident [10]. Penalties for the Company - Anhui Xintai New Materials Co., Ltd. is recommended to face penalties for its responsibility in the accident, as per the provisions of the Safety Production Law [11]. Accountability of Public Officials - Issues related to the performance of local government officials and relevant departments during the investigation have been forwarded to the provincial disciplinary committee for accountability measures [12].

Core Viewpoint - The investigation report reveals a significant safety incident at Anhui Xintai New Materials Co., resulting in four fatalities and direct economic losses of 6.0875 million yuan due to a poisoning and asphyxiation accident during the replacement of a brine tank [2][6]. Incident Overview - The accident occurred on October 27, 2025, when employees were involved in the replacement of a brine tank, leading to the exposure of workers to high concentrations of nitrogen gas [2][6]. - The sequence of events shows a lack of safety protocols, with workers entering a confined space without proper ventilation or gas detection [6][7]. Direct Causes - The direct cause of the accident was identified as a violation of confined space safety management regulations by an employee who entered the brine tank without following necessary safety procedures [6]. - The rescue attempts were also flawed, as rescuers did not use adequate personal protective equipment, leading to further casualties [6]. Indirect Causes - The company exhibited poor safety management practices, including inadequate safety training and failure to implement a dual prevention mechanism for safety risks [7]. - Local government oversight of chemical industry safety was deemed insufficient, contributing to the incident [7]. Recommendations for Responsibility - It is suggested that one individual, the deceased workshop director, be exempt from accountability due to their death during the incident, despite their direct management responsibility [8]. - Three individuals, including the company chairman and general manager, are under police investigation and recommended for judicial processing [9]. Recommendations for Company Penalties - Anhui Xintai New Materials Co. is recommended to face penalties for its role in the accident, as per the provisions of the Safety Production Law [10]. Recommendations for Public Officials - Issues related to the performance of local government officials during the investigation have been forwarded to the provincial disciplinary committee for accountability measures [11].

Group 1 - Beijing's air quality has significantly improved, with PM2.5 levels dropping from 89.5 µg/m³ in 2013 to 27.0 µg/m³ in 2025, a reduction of 69.8% [1] - In 2025, Beijing is expected to have 311 days of good air quality, an increase of 21 days year-on-year, achieving a good air quality rate of 85.2% for the first time [1] - The number of heavy pollution days in Beijing was only 1 in the previous year, marking the lowest since monitoring began [1] Group 2 - In Jiangxi Province, several township service centers are transitioning from extended service hours to appointment-based services starting January 1, 2026 [2] - This change aims to address the issue of service availability during traditional working hours, allowing for better management of service demand [2] - The initiative to provide extended service hours began in January 2019, but is now being revised to improve efficiency [2] Group 3 - In Changchun, a ride-hailing driver was penalized for verbally abusing and threatening a passenger, resulting in the revocation of his operating license [4] - The incident was reported on January 2, and the driver was found to have a poor service attitude, leading to administrative penalties [4] - The ride-hailing platform involved has also suspended the driver's account following the incident [5] Group 4 - A mining accident in Chongqing resulted in one death, with the mine previously involved in another incident that caused three fatalities [5] - Investigations revealed that the mine had concealed details of both accidents and falsified information [5] - Authorities are taking action against individuals and entities involved in the mishandling of these incidents [5] Group 5 - A former official in Shenyang was found to have embezzled over 20 million yuan through corrupt practices while working in the urban construction bureau [6] - The official exploited the transition to online processing of administrative approvals to solicit bribes from businesses [6] - This case is part of a broader crackdown on corruption within the local government, with multiple officials facing similar investigations [6] Group 6 - An official in Jinan was investigated for serious violations of discipline, including soliciting fees from private enterprises and engaging in corrupt practices [6] - The official's actions included interfering with project bidding and accepting gifts that could influence his official duties [6] - This case highlights ongoing efforts to address corruption and improve governance in local administrations [6] Group 7 - A fire occurred at the Hubei Provincial Art Museum, but no damage to collections or injuries were reported [6] - The fire was extinguished within an hour, and the cause is currently under investigation [6] - Emergency services responded promptly to the incident, ensuring the safety of personnel and visitors [6]

Core Viewpoint - The investigation report on the "10 26" general fall accident at Rui Fu Industrial Co., Ltd. highlights serious safety violations and a cover-up by the involved parties, leading to significant injuries and regulatory failures [1][2] Group 1: Accident Details - On October 26, 2023, at approximately 10:30 AM, a worker named Pang fell from a height of about 8 meters while performing steel shed reinforcement and floor installation, resulting in severe injuries including spinal cord damage and multiple fractures [1] - The incident was classified as a general production safety responsibility accident, with one person injured [1] Group 2: Investigation Findings - The direct cause of the accident was identified as Pang lacking a special operation certificate for high-altitude work and not wearing safety protective gear while working at an unsafe site [2] - Contributing factors included the construction unit lacking proper qualifications, absence of a safety management system, and failure to conduct safety training [2] - The construction unit attempted to evade responsibility by canceling its business registration after the accident [2] Group 3: Recommendations and Preventive Measures - The report recommends administrative penalties for the involved parties, including the injured worker, the original operator of the construction unit, and the construction company [2] - It suggests that compensation disputes should be resolved through legal channels and emphasizes the need for stricter construction unit qualification reviews and adherence to accident reporting protocols to prevent future cover-ups [2]