Mock drill requirement factory india · which rule binds you now, how often, and what you file afterwards
At a major accident hazard installation the on-site emergency plan must be rehearsed every 6 months, and a report on each rehearsal goes to the authority. That duty sits in the MSIHC Rules, rule 13(4) and rule 13(5). It does not sit in the Factories Act 1948, which is repealed, though almost every answer online still says it does.
Surveyed, installed and commissioned by our own engineers.
Three deployment models, and nobody is subcontracted.
They trust VB
01 The requirement, and the state of the answers
There is no detection-accuracy figure on this page and no penalty figure either. Neither has been measured in a way that would survive a question from your Plant Head, so neither appears.
2
Drills a year at a major accident hazard installation · the six-month interval in MSIHC rule 13(4)
1 of 10
Answers on page one of this question, Google’s own answer box included, that state the interval correctly
100+
Plants and sites running VijAI on cameras already installed
Source · the MSIHC Rules for cell 1. Cell 2 is the VijAI PulseAI module demand register, harvested 13 September 2026: nine results on page one of the head term plus the AI Overview, read individually. Cell 3 counts installed sites. Neither cell 2 nor cell 3 is an outcome of anything we do.
02 The requirement
Every six months, if your site is a major accident hazard installation. Two a year, not four, and the six months is a ceiling rather than a target.
That distinction is the one that catches people. A plant that drills in January and again in September has held two drills in the calendar year and is still late, because the gap between them is eight months. The interval runs from the last drill actually held, not from the start of the year, and a calendar that resets every January will drift past the limit roughly every second year without anybody noticing.
The rule that imposes it is MSIHC rule 13(4), and the companion obligation in rule 13(5) is the one most sites discover late: the drill is not finished when the siren stops. A report goes to the authority. A drill held, debriefed and filed internally has satisfied half the duty.
This is where almost every answer you will find is wrong, and it is wrong in the same way.
The Factories Act 1948 is repealed. The Occupational Safety, Health and Working Conditions Code, 2020 took its place and carries the labour-side duties, including the emergency standards and the on-site plan obligations for a factory. The chemical-side duty, the one with the six-month drill and the report to the authority, sits in the MSIHC Rules and always did. Neither of those is the 1948 Act.
This is, close to word for word, what Google’s answer box returns for the question at the top of this page. Its cited authority is a post on a professional network. The rest of page one agrees with it: training providers, a fire-safety blog, an insurer’s content page, an HR forum thread.
With the labour-side emergency duties now carried by the OSH Code 2020 rather than by the repealed Act. One state government document on that page gets the six-month interval right, and even it presents it as an on-site emergency plan rule without naming the sub-rule.
It would be easy to read that as an indictment of the people writing those pages. It is not. The 1948 Act was the right answer for seventy-two years, it is what every training deck and every inherited compliance calendar was built on, and a repeal does not reach into a plant’s document system and update it. The error is not carelessness. It is inheritance, and inheritance is exactly the kind of error that survives an audit.
Which is why the practical risk here is not a penalty. It is the position you are in when somebody asks which instrument your drill calendar is built on and the honest answer is that nobody has checked since before the Code.
So being right about the rule is the first half of this, and it is the half a page can give you. The second half arrives at the drill itself, when you write the report under 13(5) and have to stand behind the sentence about accounting for everybody. On most sites that sentence rests on three supervisors with clipboards who were also marshalling two hundred people. It is the thinnest line in the file and everybody who has run a drill knows it.
It is also the line the cameras already in your plant can evidence, which is the part most EHS Heads do not expect, because the fix usually arrives as a purchase order and this one does not.
Your next drill produces a timed record to set beside the sheet your supervisor signed, so the sentence in the 13(5) report has something standing behind it. No new hardware, one module, one plant, and nothing to decide beyond letting us survey one assembly point.
Start a 30-day pilot →Two sub-rules, one chain. The first creates the drill, the second creates the paperwork, and sites tend to be strong on one and thin on the other.
The MSIHC rules 13(4) mock drill duty is the first of the two, and it is worth reading the chain in order, because each sub-rule assumes the one before it has been done properly.
The Manufacture, Storage and Import of Hazardous Chemical Rules, made under India’s environment protection legislation. They bite on the basis of what you hold and how much of it, not on how many people you employ. A twelve-person packing unit holding a threshold quantity carries the duty; a thousand-person assembly plant holding nothing on the schedule does not.
The occupier of a major accident hazard installation prepares an on-site emergency plan and keeps it up to date. Up to date is a live obligation, which means a plan carrying the name of a shift in-charge who left in 2023 is not compliant even if the drill schedule is perfect.
The plan is rehearsed at intervals of not more than six months. The rehearsal tests the plan as written, not a convenient subset of it. If the plan says the assembly arrangements account for everybody on site, then a drill that counts only the people on the payroll has not tested the plan.
A report on the drill goes to the authority. This is the sub-rule that turns a drill into a filing, and it is where the evidence question arrives: whatever you write in that report is what the authority has. If it says the count reconciled, the report is the only thing standing behind that statement.
The OSH Code 2020 carries the labour-side emergency duties for the factory itself. Two instruments, two sets of duties, one plant. A compliance calendar that tracks only one of them is the commonest structural gap on this subject, and it is usually the chemical-side one that is missing because it did not come from the factory inspector.
03 Your position, on one page
The plan itself runs to many pages and it is specific to your hazards. What almost no site has is the one page in front of it that says where you stand.
Not another format. Your drill record is a separate document and it has its own fields. This is the page you put in front of your Plant Head when he asks what the requirement actually is, and it answers that in eight fields, every one of which is either a fact about your site or a reference to an instrument. Nothing in it is an opinion, which is why it survives a change of EHS Head.
Major accident hazard installation, or not, decided on the chemicals held and their threshold quantities. Write the basis down, not just the conclusion, because the basis is what an amendment to a schedule can move without anything changing on the plant.
MSIHC rule 13(4) for the drill, rule 13(5) for the report, the OSH Code 2020 for the labour-side duties, and an explicit line recording that the Factories Act 1948 is repealed. That last line is the one that stops the error being inherited a second time.
Six months, and a date taken from the record rather than from recollection. If those two disagree, the record wins and the disagreement is itself a finding worth writing down.
Calculated from the last held date, in the document system, visible to somebody other than you. A next-due date that exists only in the EHS Head’s diary leaves the site the week he does.
Scenario rehearsed, date and clock times, people accounted for, what did not go to plan, corrective actions with owners and dates. And the authority it goes to, named, with the route and the date of the last submission.
Factory rules are made by the states, so the central duty is a floor and not a ceiling. One line per applicable state rule, and a line saying who checked and when. Most positions leave this field empty and most of them should not.
By role and not by name, so the position does not go stale when a person moves. And a written answer to the awkward case: who signs when the person who normally signs is the person unaccounted for.
Plan, drill records, reports, acknowledgements, with a location a second person could find in ten minutes. If producing the last four drill reports takes a week of looking through files, the gap is not compliance. It is retrieval, and retrieval is what an inspection tests.
Seven of those eight fields you can fill in this afternoon from your own file. Field 05 is the one that depends on what you could actually observe during the drill, and that is the field a survey answers. Have one assembly point surveyed →
Here is the position completed, for a site that found two problems while filling it in. Both problems are common and neither was the drill.
DRILL COMPLIANCE POSITION one per installation
INSTALLATION .......................... DATE ..................
COMPLETED BY .......................... ROLE ..................
01 INSTALLATION CLASS
MAH installation? YES / NO
Basis (chemicals and threshold quantities)
..................................................................
02 GOVERNING INSTRUMENT
Drill ........ MSIHC rule 13(4)
Report ....... MSIHC rule 13(5)
Labour side .. OSH Code 2020
Replaced ..... Factories Act 1948, REPEALED confirm .....
03 INTERVAL AND LAST DRILL
Maximum interval ...... 6 months
Last drill HELD ....... ................. (from the record)
Record and calendar agree? YES / NO
04 NEXT DUE
Derived from last held ......... .................
In the document system? YES / NO
Visible to someone other than the author? YES / NO
05 REPORT UNDER 13(5)
Authority it goes to ..............................................
Last submission date ............. Acknowledged? YES / NO
Reports on file for the last four drills? 4 / 3 / 2 / 1 / 0
06 STATE RULES THAT ADD TO THE CENTRAL DUTY
Applicable state ..................................................
What it adds ......................................................
Checked by .................... Date .................
07 SIGNATURES, BY ROLE
Signs .......................... Countersigns ..................
If the signatory is the person unaccounted for, who signs?
..................................................................
08 WHERE THE EVIDENCE IS KEPT
Plan ......... Drill records ......... Reports .........
Last four reports producible today in under an hour? YES / NO
THREE THINGS THAT MAKE THIS WRONG MORE OFTEN THAN ANYTHING ELSE
02 left citing the 1948 Act
03 interval assumed annual because the fire drill is annual
04 next due date held in one person's diary
Notes ................................................................
......................................................................
No gate, no email box, no second form. Copy it, print it, fill it in for one installation this week.
Current against · the MSIHC Rules, rule 13(4) and 13(5) · the Occupational Safety, Health and Working Conditions Code, 2020. Re-verified October 2026.
04 Where it gets local
Usually, yes. India’s factory rules are made by the states, so the central duty is the floor and your state builds on it.
This is visible in the search behaviour before you ever open a rule book. On the query for the on-site emergency plan requirement, four of the nine results on page one are state directorates, and the related searches run state by state. The market is not asking what the law is. It is asking what the law is here, which is the right question.
What the states vary is rarely the six-month interval itself. It is the surrounding apparatus, and those are the fields a central checklist leaves blank.
| What a state rule tends to add | Why it is missed | Where it lands in your position |
|---|---|---|
| A notification or approval step on the plan itself | It is a one-time act, so it is done once and never revisited when the plan changes materially | Field 06, and it pulls field 02 |
| A prescribed form or format for the submission | The central rule says a report; the state says a report that looks like this | Field 05 |
| The office that receives it, and the route | Reorganisations move it, and nobody updates a compliance matrix after a reorganisation | Field 05 |
| Record retention and inspection availability | Treated as a filing preference rather than a duty, until an inspection asks | Field 08 |
| A separate fire or emergency services requirement | It is a different department, so it arrives through a different person and lives in a different file | Field 06, and it is the commonest source of the annual-drill confusion |
That last row deserves a sentence of its own, because it explains the single commonest mistake on this subject. A fire drill and the rehearsal of an on-site emergency plan are two different duties with two different intervals, imposed by two different authorities, and on most sites they are run by the same three people on the same afternoon. Once they are run together they start being recorded together, and once they are recorded together the shorter interval quietly inherits the longer one.
What this page does not do is tell you what your state requires. Factory rules differ, they are amended, and a page cannot be current on fifteen of them at once. Field 06 exists so that the answer is written down by somebody who checked, with a date against their name, which is the only form of that answer worth having.
One thing does not vary by state, though. Whatever your directorate adds to the form or the route, every one of them is reading a report that says people were accounted for. See what a timed count looks like →
05 What gets this sent back
Every one of those five is a condition rather than a person. That is accuracy and not diplomacy: all five survive a change of staff, and four of them were created by a system that was correct when it was built. Not one of them is a failure to conduct the drill. On the sites where this gets looked at properly, the drill is almost always being done, and what is thin is the position behind it and the paper after it.
A drill proves that people can get out, that the alarm reaches them, that the routes work and that the response team knows its part. Six months of nothing changing, and then one rehearsal that tests all of it. That is a real thing and it is worth the disruption.
What a drill does not prove, by design, is how certain you were. The report under 13(5) says what happened, and the whole of its authority rests on what you were able to observe while it was happening. Three supervisors with clipboards at three assembly points, all of them also marshalling people, is the observation method on most Indian sites. It is not a criticism of the supervisors. It is one pair of eyes per fifty people, during the four minutes when the plant is doing the least normal thing it ever does.
So the sentence in the report that is hardest to stand behind is rarely about the evacuation. It is the one about accounting for everybody.
Your cameras are already pointed at the assembly points. During the drill VijAI counts what they see and puts a clock on it, so the report under 13(5) carries a second record taken at the same moment by something that was not also marshalling two hundred people. Arrival times at each point, person by person where the view allows it, and the minute the count closed.
It runs on the cameras you have. Zero new hardware, which on this particular duty matters more than usual, because nothing in rule 13 asks you to buy anything and a compliance answer that starts with a purchase order is a hard internal sell.
Six months later it is the part of the file that answers a question with a time in it. When the authority or your own corporate audit asks how the count was established, the answer is the sheet your supervisor signed plus a timed record that was produced independently of him. 100+ plants and sites run VijAI on cameras that were already installed, and the survey tells you which of your assembly points are among them. Most sites find the main one is.
One line so nothing is misread. VijAI evidences that a person was present at a stated place at a stated time. It does not conduct your drill, it does not write or sign your report, it does not decide whether a count has reconciled, and it is not a life-safety system. Rule 13(4) is a duty on the occupier and it stays there. What changes is what you can put behind the sentence you write afterwards.
Deployment is settled at the survey and never quoted before it: on-premise edge where nothing leaves the fence, which is what most Indian chemical sites choose, or hybrid, or cloud.
L0 · THE MODULE
PulseAIThe module this page belongs to. A camera you already own, asked how many people are standing in front of it, and the handful of moments in a plant when that number decides something.
The module →L2 · ACCOUNTING FOR PEOPLE
Accounting for everybody in an evacuationWhat it takes to close a count at the assembly point, what the category sells for it today, and the twelve-question readiness check.
The specification →L3 · THE RECORD
The drill record formatOnce your position is fixed, this is the document that carries each individual drill. Every field it needs, and the reasons one comes back.
The format →NEXT · ONE PLANT
A survey before your next drillThirty days on one assembly point, so your next rehearsal produces a timed record to set beside the sheet somebody signed.
Talk to us →Sources · the Manufacture, Storage and Import of Hazardous Chemical Rules, rule 13, the on-site emergency plan, its rehearsal at intervals of not more than six months under sub-rule (4) and the report to the authority under sub-rule (5) · the Occupational Safety, Health and Working Conditions Code, 2020, which replaced the Factories Act 1948 and carries the labour-side emergency duties · the VijAI PulseAI module demand register, harvested 13 September 2026, for the page-one measurement and the state pattern described above. Named in text and not linked, so nothing on this page sends a reader away from it, and so that no instrument on this page is represented by somebody else’s copy of it.
06 How it runs
The first question IT asks is where the video goes. All three answers are here, and detection by default with identification optional applies to every one of them.
| Model | Where the video is processed | Where it fits |
|---|---|---|
| On-premise edge | Entirely inside the plant. Nothing leaves your network. | Licensed areas, sites with a data-residency rule, and plants with no dependable outbound link. |
| HybridRecommended | Detection at the edge, dashboards and reporting hosted. Footage stays on site. Only events leave. | Most plants. Video stays inside the boundary and head office still gets one view across every site. |
| Cloud | Processing and storage hosted. | Single sites, short pilots, and estates already running their VMS this way. |
The model is chosen in the survey, against your network and your data rules. It is not a price tier.
07 Who installs it
Survey, engineering, installation, commissioning, calibration, training and support are all done by VB people. When a camera angle is wrong on a Sunday night, the person who fixes it is the person who chose it.
08 The six we are asked
At a major accident hazard installation in India, every six months. That is two a year, and the interval is a maximum rather than a target, so a drill held seven months after the last one is late even if two were held in the calendar year. The duty sits in the MSIHC Rules at rule 13(4), and a report on each drill goes to the authority under rule 13(5).
The premise of the question is the problem. The Factories Act 1948 is repealed and the Occupational Safety, Health and Working Conditions Code, 2020 took its place, so there is no live Factories Act interval to quote. For a major accident hazard installation the six-month drill duty is in the MSIHC Rules at rule 13(4). Almost every answer online still attributes it to the 1948 Act, including Google’s own answer box.
Rehearse the on-site emergency plan as written, unannounced where you safely can, from detection through to all-clear. Nominate an observer who is not part of the response, put a clock on each step, account for every person at the assembly point by name, and record the time each step closed. Then write the report that goes to the authority. The step most often skipped is the last one, and it is the only part the authority sees.
The occupier of a major accident hazard installation must prepare and keep up to date an on-site emergency plan covering the hazards identified, the response arrangements, the people responsible, the assembly arrangements and the means of accounting for everybody on site. The plan has to be rehearsed every six months and a report of each rehearsal sent to the authority. The duty attaches to the installation, so a group of sites cannot share one plan.
The Manufacture, Storage and Import of Hazardous Chemical Rules, made under the environment protection legislation. They classify installations by the chemicals held and their threshold quantities, and they impose duties on whoever holds those quantities, including the on-site emergency plan and its six-month rehearsal. They sit alongside the labour-side duties rather than inside them, which is exactly why a drill calendar built only on factory law misses them.
The rules have been amended more than once since they were made, and the threshold quantity schedules are the part most often revisited. Check the amendment position for your own chemicals and quantities rather than relying on a PDF of the original rules, because a threshold change can move an installation into or out of major accident hazard classification without anything changing on the plant.
09 The next step
You will know by your next drill whether the sentence about accounting for everybody is one you can stand behind. No new hardware, one module, one plant.
Send an enquiry