Employee trapped inside equipment because of a lack of isolation

Manufacturer of carbon-based products, SGL Carbon Fibres Limited (SGL), was fined £12,000 following an incident where an employee sustained soft tissue injuries to his right hip and a fracture to his lower right leg.

The circumstances were:

• The accident occurred during maintenance on a Regenerative Thermal Oxidiser (RTO).
• There was a general permit to work.
• However, no risk assessment was undertaken to identify any specific risks beyond the general ones mentioned on the Permit to Work documentation.
• Also, pre-existing relevant procedures were not implemented.
• As a result, the task was not clearly supervised, informed by a suitable and sufficient risk assessment and consequent work instructions, with appropriate supervision and monitoring to ensure the identified safe system of work was implemented.
• On 25 April 2016, and employee was inside the RTO when he become trapped between a moving poppet valve and the valve seat.

Hose manufacturer fined after inexperienced employee was caught in unguarded machinery

Wirral-based Novaflex Ltd., that manufactures composite hose products was fined £29,000 (inc.costs) after an inexperienced agency worker was injured when he was pulled into a spinning lathe, sustaining open fractures to his right arm.

The circumstances were:

• The accident occurred between a pitch wheel and mandrel on a lathe.
• The lathe had been modified which made operators work closer to the entrapment hazard.
• The company had not identified the risk of entrapment or the necessary controls required to avoid it.
• As a result, Novaflex had failed to effectively prevent access to dangerous parts of the machinery.
• They also failed to provide a safe system of work for the task 
• They had not provided adequate instruction and training to ensure its workers were competent to operate the machinery.
• On 20 November 2018, a worker at Novaflex Ltd was operating the lathe when the sleeve of his sweatshirt caught between a pitch wheel and rotating mandrel, pulling his arm into the machine. 
• This resulted in an open fracture of the ulna (long bone found in the forearm) and the radial shaft of his right arm, leaving it permanently weak, making day-to-day tasks difficult and stressful. He also suffered severe bruising to his body and skin abrasions.

The HSE inspector said:
“Those in control of a workplace have a responsibility to identify and devise safe methods of working and to provide the necessary information, instruction and training to their workers.”

Woodworking company fined £59,000 after worker became entnagled in unguarded driveshaft

Woodworking company, Peter Ramsey & Sons (Denholme) Timber Ltd, was fined £59,484 (inc. costs) after a worker became entangled in an unguarded drive shaft and suffered serious injuries.

The circumstances were:

• The accident occurred on a wood planer.
• A new conveyor line had been installed and the planer then had an unguarded rotating driveshaft.
• No risk assessments had been carried out which, if done correctly, would have identified the risk posed by this.
• On 8 March 2018, a worker reached over the driveshaft to reach some wood.
• His hi-vis jacket and t-shirt became entangled, drawing him into the machine. 
• He sustained a torn tendon in his left fourth finger, a broken left wrist, a break to his little finger and nerve damage to his left arm.

The HSE inspector commented:
“The company should have produced a detailed risk assessment when the conveyor was added to the existing machine. This could have identified that there was an unguarded rotating drive shaft which required guarding to prevent access. This injury could have been easily prevented, and the risk should have been identified.”

UKCA and CE marking rules change again.

 

Like with most of the Brexit situation, the UKCA mark is a confusing mess.  Originally, the UKCA mark was supposed to replace the CE mark for equipment which originated in the UK and stayed here, with this coming into force at the end of 2020.  

Then it changed so with the UK Government making provision for the UKCA mark, but having it being complimentary to the CE mark and not replacing it.   The default would be the CE mark, but the UKCA mark is there in case there are circumstances where the CE mark cannot be used.  An example of this would be if a company had made use of a UK Approved Body.

Now it has changed back again.

The default mark from 1st January 2021 is now the UKCA mark, but you are still allowed to use the CE mark until 1st January 2022.

This applies to all equipment placed on the UK market, with the exception of Northern Ireland who will still use the CE mark. 

See support for machinery manufacturers on CE marking from Strategic Safety Systems Ltd.