The long awaited Waste (England and Wales) Regs 2011 are available for consultation. Unfortunately, they don’t live up to the promise of their 2009 version and they don’t replace as much as they could do. Main features are:
• Repeals some legislation (see bottom of blog) and combines regulations.
• Specifies a hierarchy of
1. Prevention
2. Reuse
3. Recycling
4. Recovery eg energy recovery
5. Disposal
taking into account technical and economic feasibility, protection of resources, etc., and requires producer to confirm that they have applied this hierarchy.
• Specifies (in Sch.2) amendments to Hazardous Waste Regulations, (in Sch.3) amendments to Environmental Permitting Regulations and (in Sch.4) amendments to other regulations.
• Covers activities by local authorities. Requires producer to register (by Dec.13) if they carry their own controlled waste.
Repeals:
Environmental Protection (Duty of Care) Regulations 1991
Waste Management Licensing Regulations 1994 (as amended 1995, 1997)
Wednesday, 16 March 2011
Sunday, 6 March 2011
Engineer maimed during second day at new job
An engineering firm failed on three separate occasions to make sure that a drill had adequate guarding before it was used by an employee.
Michael O’Brien, 60, suffered permanent loss of movement to three fingers in his left hand after his glove was drawn into the chuck of a drill, while working as an engineer on only his second day at Jex Engineering Company Ltd.
A court heard that the incident took place on 1 December 2009, while Mr O’Brien was installing a machine during the construction of a waste-transfer station in Leyland, Preston.
He was drilling holes into a steel plate as part of the installation of a conveyor belt, which was being built to transfer waste at the site. Jex Engineering had hired a magnetic drill stand and drill unit but didn’t check that the machine’s guard was in place. As Mr O’Brien began drilling, the back of his left glove touched the rotating drill and his hand was pulled into the machine. He spent four days in hospital and required several skin grafts. He has been unable to return to work owing to his injuries.
HSE inspector, Allen Shute, revealed that the company wasted several opportunities to make sure the drill had adequate guarding. It could have made appropriate checks when the drill was delivered, when it was issued to Mr O’Brien, and when it carried out a full-site risk assessment before the work began.
Inspector Shute said: “These injuries have had a devastating impact on an engineer who relies on being able to use his hands for his job. Sadly, he has been unable to find work since the incident.
“Jex had three separate opportunities to make sure the drill was fitted with a guard, but it failed to act on all three occasions. Even small drills have the potential to cause serious injuries if they are not fitted with a guard. It’s therefore vital that companies take the risk seriously.”
Jex Engineering Company appeared at South Ribble Magistrates’ Court, in Leyland, on 23 February and pleaded guilty to breaching Reg. 11(1)(a) of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998, for failing to prevent access to dangerous machine parts. It was fined £4000 and ordered to pay £3250 towards costs.
In mitigation, the firm said it had no previous convictions and it stopped using the drill immediately following the incident. It has introduced a company-wide policy stipulating that all hired machinery must be checked to make sure it is safe for use before being issued to staff. The company has also sent its senior managers on health and safety training.
Speaking after the case, Mr O’Brien commented: “I’d only been working for the company for a couple of days but you just expect employers to know what they’re doing when it comes to health and safety.
“Two of my fingers have been virtually paralysed and I now find it very difficult to grip with my left hand. Things I used to be able to do naturally, like holding a fork or opening a jar, now take real effort. I just hope the same thing doesn’t happen to someone else, as I wouldn’t wish it on anyone.”
Source: SHP 25/2/11
Michael O’Brien, 60, suffered permanent loss of movement to three fingers in his left hand after his glove was drawn into the chuck of a drill, while working as an engineer on only his second day at Jex Engineering Company Ltd.
A court heard that the incident took place on 1 December 2009, while Mr O’Brien was installing a machine during the construction of a waste-transfer station in Leyland, Preston.
He was drilling holes into a steel plate as part of the installation of a conveyor belt, which was being built to transfer waste at the site. Jex Engineering had hired a magnetic drill stand and drill unit but didn’t check that the machine’s guard was in place. As Mr O’Brien began drilling, the back of his left glove touched the rotating drill and his hand was pulled into the machine. He spent four days in hospital and required several skin grafts. He has been unable to return to work owing to his injuries.
HSE inspector, Allen Shute, revealed that the company wasted several opportunities to make sure the drill had adequate guarding. It could have made appropriate checks when the drill was delivered, when it was issued to Mr O’Brien, and when it carried out a full-site risk assessment before the work began.
Inspector Shute said: “These injuries have had a devastating impact on an engineer who relies on being able to use his hands for his job. Sadly, he has been unable to find work since the incident.
“Jex had three separate opportunities to make sure the drill was fitted with a guard, but it failed to act on all three occasions. Even small drills have the potential to cause serious injuries if they are not fitted with a guard. It’s therefore vital that companies take the risk seriously.”
Jex Engineering Company appeared at South Ribble Magistrates’ Court, in Leyland, on 23 February and pleaded guilty to breaching Reg. 11(1)(a) of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998, for failing to prevent access to dangerous machine parts. It was fined £4000 and ordered to pay £3250 towards costs.
In mitigation, the firm said it had no previous convictions and it stopped using the drill immediately following the incident. It has introduced a company-wide policy stipulating that all hired machinery must be checked to make sure it is safe for use before being issued to staff. The company has also sent its senior managers on health and safety training.
Speaking after the case, Mr O’Brien commented: “I’d only been working for the company for a couple of days but you just expect employers to know what they’re doing when it comes to health and safety.
“Two of my fingers have been virtually paralysed and I now find it very difficult to grip with my left hand. Things I used to be able to do naturally, like holding a fork or opening a jar, now take real effort. I just hope the same thing doesn’t happen to someone else, as I wouldn’t wish it on anyone.”
Source: SHP 25/2/11
Thursday, 24 February 2011
EU orders UK to tighten asbestos laws
The European Commission has requested that the UK amend its regulations on asbestos at work because they do not comply fully with the parent EU Directive.
Delivered in the form of a reasoned opinion under EU infringement procedures, the Commission wants the UK to change provisions in its legislation that exempt some maintenance and repair activities from the application of the EU Directive on the protection of workers from asbestos.
It follows a complaint received by the Commission that Article 3(3)(a) and (b) of the asbestos Directive 2009/148/EC has not been correctly transposed into UK law. Article 3(3) offers the possibility for an exemption from three obligations set out in the Directive for activities that involve only sporadic and low-intensity exposure to asbestos – for example, in the case of some maintenance and repair activities.
However, in the Commission’s view, the UK law omits specific parts of Article 3(3)(a) and (b), and so widens the scope of the exemption. The Commission says the UK legislation focuses on the measurement of exposure to asbestos but not enough on how the material can be affected by the work involved. The Directive deals with both exposure and the material.
The UK now has two months to bring its legislation into line with EU law, or risk the matter being referred to the EU’s Court of Justice.
Commenting on the development, TUC general secretary, Brendan Barber, said: “This is another nail in the coffin of the myth that the HSE has been ‘gold-plating’ regulation. European regulations are there to protect workers, and governments should see them as being minimum standards rather than trying to weasel out of their commitments.”
Alan Ritchie, general secretary of construction-workers’ union UCATT, added: "Construction workers, especially those involved in maintenance work, are now at the greatest risk of being exposed to asbestos and developing asbestos-related diseases.
“It is essential that they are given the greatest possible training, education and protection when it comes to dealing with asbestos. UCATT’s advice is clear: if you are not a specialist, do not work with asbestos. If, at any point, you think you are working with asbestos, stop work immediately and get it checked out.”
A spokesperson for the HSE said: “The reasoned opinion is a long and complex legal document and we need to look at it carefully before we decide how to respond.”
Source: SHP
Delivered in the form of a reasoned opinion under EU infringement procedures, the Commission wants the UK to change provisions in its legislation that exempt some maintenance and repair activities from the application of the EU Directive on the protection of workers from asbestos.
It follows a complaint received by the Commission that Article 3(3)(a) and (b) of the asbestos Directive 2009/148/EC has not been correctly transposed into UK law. Article 3(3) offers the possibility for an exemption from three obligations set out in the Directive for activities that involve only sporadic and low-intensity exposure to asbestos – for example, in the case of some maintenance and repair activities.
However, in the Commission’s view, the UK law omits specific parts of Article 3(3)(a) and (b), and so widens the scope of the exemption. The Commission says the UK legislation focuses on the measurement of exposure to asbestos but not enough on how the material can be affected by the work involved. The Directive deals with both exposure and the material.
The UK now has two months to bring its legislation into line with EU law, or risk the matter being referred to the EU’s Court of Justice.
Commenting on the development, TUC general secretary, Brendan Barber, said: “This is another nail in the coffin of the myth that the HSE has been ‘gold-plating’ regulation. European regulations are there to protect workers, and governments should see them as being minimum standards rather than trying to weasel out of their commitments.”
Alan Ritchie, general secretary of construction-workers’ union UCATT, added: "Construction workers, especially those involved in maintenance work, are now at the greatest risk of being exposed to asbestos and developing asbestos-related diseases.
“It is essential that they are given the greatest possible training, education and protection when it comes to dealing with asbestos. UCATT’s advice is clear: if you are not a specialist, do not work with asbestos. If, at any point, you think you are working with asbestos, stop work immediately and get it checked out.”
A spokesperson for the HSE said: “The reasoned opinion is a long and complex legal document and we need to look at it carefully before we decide how to respond.”
Source: SHP
Monday, 21 February 2011
Occupational Safety and Health Consultants Register up and running
This register is now up and running. This came about because of Lord Young's report which suggested that individual consultants were to blame for the silly stuff like banning conkers whereas really the compensation culture needs to be addressed first. However, people who have chartered status as a health and safety consultant (like me) can now register. Eventaully, the public will be able to access this register.Trade associations don't have to register and, one supposes that Lord Young decided they were quite able to select advisors who are suitably qualified.
The general consensus is that this register will have no effect.
Monday, 7 February 2011
Changes to RIDDOR
The following changes are proposed to RIDDOR:
- Change reporting threshold from over 3-days to over 7-days
SSS stance: In favour. This reduces the workload on industry and removes the confusion when 3 days includes a weekend. However, data will be lost and there is the danger that 3 days will be regarded as not serious. - Include a requirement to investigate reportable incidents
SSS stance: In favour. All incidents must be investigated, but this must be to an appropriate level. - Include travelling on company business as a work activity
SSS stance: In favour. Travelling on company business can be a serious source of incidents. - Improve the sharing of information from the HSE
SSS stance: In favour. It's been a long-standing gripe of ours that the HSE do not share all this information that RIDDOR brings in.
Saturday, 15 January 2011
Air conditioning checks
If your air-conditioning system has an output of over 12kW, you need to meet certain requirements for inspecting the energy efficiency of your systems. If you have more than one air-conditioning unit within a building they are considered to be a single system.
In England, Northern Ireland and Wales, from 4 January 2011, if your air-conditioning system has an output over 12kW it must be inspected at least every five years. If your system was first put into service on or after 1 January 2008, it must have its first inspection within five years of the date when it was first put into service.
Inspections must be carried out at least every five years by an accredited energy assessor who will assess the efficiency of the system and advise on improvements.
Source: NetRegs
Monday, 10 January 2011
INTACT 7.0 released
The integrated action mananagment system, INTACT, is now available as version 7.0.
What we've done is to take 4 sets of requirements developed to meet the requirements of 4 companies and to merge them into the standard version. The new features cover the areas of:
What we've done is to take 4 sets of requirements developed to meet the requirements of 4 companies and to merge them into the standard version. The new features cover the areas of:
- Training - advanced listing and team briefing reports
- Quality assurance - advanced data entry, analysis and reporting
- With the team briefing, INTACT now gives a listing of all people who have missed a briefing.
- With QA, INTACT can now provide rework and scrap tickets, removing the need for duplicate data entry.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)