Lack of system to isolate machine causes near-death injuries

Hunter Wilson Ltd, a Dumfries wood machining company , was fined £44,000 after a worker was caught in moving machinery.

The circumstances were:

• The equipment on which the accident occurred was a log haul.
• In 2007 the company installed an automated scraper system to scrape fallen debris.
• This consisted of two horizontal cross sections of steel, or scraper bars, that moved slowly on a continuous loop along the concrete platforms under each of the log hauls, scraping debris and pushing it off the end of the platforms where it could be safely collected.
•  However, the system was not able to clear all of the debris, resulting in employees still having to go under the log haul platforms to manually clear out the remaining debris at the end of each day.
• The company failed to provide fixed guarding enclosing the machine’s dangerous parts and interlocking guarding to stop dangerous parts moving before a worker entered the danger zones.
• The company also failed to provide effective supervision in order to prevent its employees from entering danger zones while dangerous parts were moving,
• At the end of each working day one of Steven Cairns’ duties was to clean the areas below two log hauls, where debris such as bark and branches had fallen.
• On the day of the incident Mr. Cairns was clearing debris from under the log haul when one of the moving scraper bars came from behind him and crushed his pelvis against the base of a step feeder machine. It then continued on, dragging him through a shear point where the bar passed under the base of the machine.
• He managed to drag himself free and was discovered shortly after by colleagues who responded to his screams.

The HSE Inspector said:

“This incident was entirely preventable. Hunter Wilson Ltd had identified the scraper system as a risk to employees, however, the company failed to apply the hierarchy of control measures provided by Regulation 11 of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998, which requires employers to provide fixed guarding enclosing dangerous moving parts of machinery, to the extent that it is practicable to do so, before moving on to consider a safe system of work. Had fixed guards been in place to physically prevent access, then employees would not have been exposed to the risk from the dangerous moving bars of the scraper system. As a consequence of this breach, Mr Cairns suffered horrific injuries from which he will never fully recover.”

HSE updates ACOP on Workplace

The HSE has provided an updated version of the Workplace Regulations Approved Code of Practice (ACOP) (L24) to make it easier for employers, building owners, landlords and managing agents to understand and meet their legal obligations and so reduce the risks of over compliance.

The Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992 to which this refers are not changed and the ACOP is really just a clarification.

Download a free copy of the ACOP

Unguarded sawblade causes major injuries

A 20 year old man suffered major arm injuries on a poorly guarded saw.

The circumstances were:

• The accident occurred at  Brumley Brae sawmill. owned by  Tennants (Elgin) Limited on 26 September 2011.
• It occurred on a bandsaw, used to cut large pieces of timber, with a continuous blade revolving at high speed. 
• The drive wheels and chain drive were unguarded and the saw-blade guard was not positioned correctly.
• This was despite the risks being widely known in the woodworking industry.
• Training in the use of the machine was informal and generally carried out by the person who had previously used it, whether or not they had ever been formally trained themselves.
• Employees had not been made aware of the risks and dangers which could occur during woodcutting operations. 
• They had not been given a push-stick which would have allowed them to move wood through the machinery whilst remaining at a distance from cutting blades.
• The injured person, Damian Gawlowski, had not received any formal training on the machine.
• He was left unsupervised even though he was untrained and inexperienced.
• Whilst trying to feed some wood through, his arm was drawn into the machine and cut in half lengthways up to the elbow.
• He sustained significant injuries and needed 16 operations to try and repair ligament, muscle and nerve damage. He has lost one finger entirely and part of another finger, and now struggles to use his right hand.

Tennants  was fined £30,000 15 November 2013.

The HSE Principal Inspector  said:

“This incident was wholly avoidable. Damian Gawlowski was let down by the company’s lack of proper training, inadequate assessment of risks, and ineffective measures to stop access to dangerous parts of equipment. From Mr Gawlowski’s point of view, his life has been destroyed. He is unable to go back to work, unable to use his hand and he relies on others for many of the tasks of daily living. The risks of bandsaws – where there are fast moving cutting parts – are well known in the sawmill industry and Tennants (Elgin) Limited should have put in place suitable measures to prevent this type of injury from occurring. Instead Mr Gawlowski has been left with a serious injury from which it’s likely he will never completely recover.”

Failure to control site vehicle operations results in death

An employee of UK Wood Recycling Ltd., was killed after being struck by a loading vehicle.

The circumstances were:

• No segregation measures had been put in place by UK Wood Recycling Ltd to separate vehicles and pedestrians working on the site. 
• Workers were unprotected from the dangers of constantly moving vehicles, despite previous incidents where vehicles had collided, and workers reporting other near misses.
• On 19 December 2008 Raymond Burns had been working around a large wood pile being used to feed a hammer mill where the wood was smashed to chips. 
• The shovel vehicle was moving material from one part of the site to another. 
• As he crossed to a skip, Mr Burns was struck and run over by the load shovel and died of his injuries at the scene.

UK Wood Recycling Ltd  was fined £234,000 (inc. costs) on 12th November 2013. 

The HSE Inspector said: 

“A conscientious and hard-working man has lost his life in this senseless way.  There was simply an acceptance by UK Wood Recycling Ltd of the established working pattern.  Solely relying on drivers or workers noticing each other is not adequate control. This was an entirely preventable death caused by the company failing to have a system to allow vehicles and pedestrians to move safely around each other. Ideally, this segregation is achieved by the vehicles and pedestrians having separate traffic routes.  If they share a route or area then physical barriers should be used to keep them apart, or other means of preventing moving vehicles and people being in the same place at the same time. The waste industry has a very high injury rate, and most of the fatal and major injuries relate to transport issues. The risks of serious injury and, all too frequently, death, resulting from the failure to control the safe movement of vehicles and pedestrians are widely recognised.”

Use of the combined UKAS and certification body logos.

UKAS have some restrictions on how the combined mark can and cannot be used.

The following rules apply:

The combined Mark can be used on:

• Stationery – Letterheads, compliment slips, labels, invoices. The combined Mark may be used on business cards but must always be legible.
• Advertising material – Posters, TV advertisements, promotional videos, newsletters, brochures. The combined mark can be used on a client company web-site but should not appear on web-pages which directly promote the client company’s products or services, so as to avoid the suggestion of ‘product certification’.
• Internal walls and doors.
• Exhibition stands.

The combined Mark cannot be used on:

• Products.
• Publicity information on products – This includes notices, labels, documents or written announcements, affixed to or otherwise appearing on goods or products. This restriction also applies to primary (e.g. blister packs) packaging and promotional products (see below).
• Vehicles - Except if you have a poster or advert for your organisation in which you include the combined Mark, then you can put that poster (including the combined Mark) on a vehicle.
• Buildings and flags.
• Promotional gifts – Mugs, calendars, Christmas cards, paperweights.
• Test and calibration reports and certificates

There are rules on size and colour of logos, but consult your certification body about this.

Consultation on dichloromethane in hard ink removers and paint strippers

Under the REACH Enforcement Regulations 2008, there is a European ban on dichloromethane. 

The HSE has proposed an amendment which will allow it still to be used.
The planned amendment will introduce necessary training requirements and a mandatory certificate of competence for professional users who wish to purchase and use DCM-based paint strippers.

SSS's stance has always been that ink strippers containing dichloromethane should be phased out of printing companies that still use it.

See the HSE's consultative document.

Lancaster firm fined £10,000 after guillotine severs hand

Charlesworth Tree Care and Fencing Ltd., a Lancaster timber firm has been fined £10,000 (inc. costs) after a guillotine severed the hand of one of its employees.

The circumstances were:

• A worker was feeding pieces of wood into a diesel-powered guillotine, known as a logger.
• The guarding on the machine was poor and it was possible to reach under the blade while operating the guillotine.
• The system was to push wood in using his right hand and to operate the control lever with his left hand.
• He accidentally pulled down the lever before he had removed his right hand from under the blade.
• The blade passed through the top of his hand, just below his knuckles, breaking all the bones in its path and severing all the tendons.
• Surgeons managed to sew his hand back together during a six-hour operation but he had to have part of his little finger amputated and now has very limited movement in his hand.

The HSE Inspector said:

“A long-serving employee at the firm suffered life-changing injuries because the company’s safety precautions on this machine weren’t anywhere near good enough. The guillotine had been at the timber yard for over a decade but it wasn’t in daily use and didn’t meet the standards of other equipment owned by the company. This case should act as a warning to firms to make sure all their equipment meets minimum safety requirements, no matter how frequently or infrequently it is used.”