Public will be better informed about major-hazard risks 14 August 2012

New rules came into force on the 13 August aimed at providing better information for EU citizens about major threats posed by industrial plants in their immediate vicinity.

The changes are part of an update of the Seveso Directive, which is being adapted to reflect recent changes in the international and European classification of chemicals. The Directive, which was first introduced in 1982, obliges Member States to draw up emergency plans for areas surrounding industrial installations where very large quantities of dangerous substances are to be found.

The revisions mean that all establishments covered by the legislation will need to provide electronically available information about how alerts will be sounded, and about how the public should act in the event of a major accident. In such an event, the relevant authorities will need to inform anyone likely to be affected by it and explain the main measures taken to address it.

Changes to land-use planning laws will see the introduction of an appropriate ‘safety’ distance in plans for new establishments and infrastructure near existing sites.

When authorities and establishments assess the potential for major accidents and adopt measures to address this, they will need to take better account of the risks arising out of the proximity to other industrial sites and potential repercussions on nearby installations.

The updated Seveso Directive will also impose stricter standards for inspections of industrial sites that fall under the legislation.

Environment commissioner Janez Potocnik said: “Seveso III will mean better protection against major accidents for citizens and the environment. It will also mean that citizens are better informed and more involved in land-use planning decisions.”

Seveso legislation is considered to have been instrumental in reducing the likelihood and consequences of major accidents involving dangerous substances. Between 2000 and 2008 the number of reported accidents fell by 10 per cent, notwithstanding an increase in the number of sites.

Member States will have until 1 June 2015 to align their national legislation with the new rules; the deadline coincides with the date when the new chemicals classification legislation – the Classification, Labelling and Packaging of Substances and Mixtures (CLP Regulation) – becomes fully applicable in Europe.

Health and safety risks of school facilities exposed 03 September 2012

Just under half of teachers responding to a survey on the quality of the school estate believe the building in which they work poses a health and safety hazard.

A total of 2178 teachers from a range of schools across the UK participated in the survey, commissioned by ITV’s Daybreak and the Times Educational Supplement (TES).

One in four teachers conceded that they would not send their children to the school in which they work because of the state of the facilities. Just over half of teachers who responded thought their lessons were made harder by inadequate facilities, with one in five teachers going as far to say that their classrooms were unfit to work in.

A quarter of teachers said their school had been rejected funds for building and renovation work, and of these, a fifth claimed their school had been turned down more than three times. Most teachers (86 per cent) agreed that better facilities would have a positive impact on pupils’ teaching experience and their behaviour.

Gerard Kelly, editor of the Times Educational Supplement, said: “The quality of school buildings are very important to teaching, and it is apparent that there is a need for investment. While one has to accept that we live in straitened times, it is clear that finding cash to refurbish our crumbling schools should be a matter of urgency.”

However, a spokesperson for the Department for Education said the survey questionnaire was biased and failed to give an accurate representation of the state of the UK’s schools.



Added the spokesperson: “We have replaced previous schemes, which didn’t help the schools in the greatest need, and launched the Priority Schools Building Programme to target the worst school buildings first.



“We have also spent £5.5 billion on maintenance of school buildings; by 2015, we will have spent over £17 billion on school building projects and creating new school places to ensure schools meet the needs of their children and teachers.”

Worker's death leads to fines

  

Two companies have been fined after a man was killed when he drove a specialist machine into an unprotected pit in a factory floor.

Martin McMenemy, 52, of Grimsby, was working for O. Turner Insulation Ltd, also of Grimsby, on the construction of a food processing plant in Ratby Lane, Leicester, on 12 April 2008.

He was using a scissor lift, an extendable platform, to install wall and ceiling panels when he drove it unwittingly toward and into the shallow uncovered recess. The vehicle overturned and Mr McMenemy was thrown out of it. He died later in hospital of head injuries.

A Health and Safety Executive (HSE) investigation found that O. Turner Insulation Ltd and principal contractor Clegg Food Projects Ltd, of Nottingham, had failed to take simple precautions to cover the hole.

Leicester Crown Court heard today (24 August 2012) the incident could have been prevented had the hole been covered with a metal plate or cordoned off.

O. Turner Insulation Ltd, of Estate Road No 4, South Humberside Industrial Estate, Grimsby, pleaded guilty to breaching Regulations 13(2) and 37(6) of the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007 and was fined £22,500 with £12,806 costs.

Clegg Food Projects Ltd, of High Pavement, Nottingham, admitted breaching Regulations 22(1)(a) and 37(6) of the same Regulations and was fined £22,500 with £12,674 costs.

After the hearing HSE Inspector Stephen Farthing said:

"This was an entirely preventable tragedy. A family has been left without a father because simple precautions were not taken to eliminate what was an obvious hazard.

"Both companies had a duty to plan, manage and monitor the work being carried out under their control, but failed in that duty."

Firm fined after worker breaks neck and back in roof fall

A housing repair and maintenance company has been fined after a Nottingham worker suffered serious neck and back fractures falling 2.4 metres through a fragile roof.

The employee, 49, who has asked not to be named, needed to wear a body and neck brace for three months after falling head first through an outhouse roof in St Mary's Close, Gedling on 28 July 2010.

The Health and Safety Executive (HSE), which brought the prosecution, told Nottingham magistrates today (28 August) that the work, carried out by Morrison Facilities Service Ltd of Glasgow on behalf of Gedling Homes, had not been properly planned, supervised or carried out in a safe manner by trained staff.

The court heard that two workers were replacing cement sheets on a fragile, flat roof of a single storey outhouse. The employee accessed the roof via the top section of a triple ladder placed across it, with his colleague working from the bottom of the ladder which rested against a wall.

During the work, one of the sheets started to collapse but was left still hanging from the roof. The worker below was able to hang on to this section, while the employee attempted to get off the roof. However, while going back down the ladder, he put his hand on the collapsed sheet and immediately fell straight through it, head first, landing on a concrete floor.

The man spent ten days in Nottingham’s Queens Medical Centre and had to wear a body and neck brace for three months every time he was mobile. He was in constant pain and had to be helped with washing and dressing during this time. He also needed to walk with a stick for several weeks after the incident.

Morrison Facilities Service Ltd, of Tannochside Park, Uddingston, Glasgow, pleaded guilty to breaching Section 3(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974. The company was fined £18,000 and ordered to pay costs of £5,452

After the hearing HSE Inspector Nic Rigby said:

"Work at height carries significant risk and must be properly planned, particularly when it involves fragile roof surfaces.

"This incident has left a man with life-changing injuries yet it could have been avoided if a suitable and sufficient risk assessment had been carried out. This would have identified the need for this work to have been properly supervised and carried out by trained staff.

"The employee spent several months after the incident not knowing when he would be able to return to work or when life would return to normal."

Firms prosecuted over asbestos danger at Bolton mill

Two companies have been prosecuted after workers were exposed to potentially deadly asbestos fibres at a mill in Bolton.

A pile of damaged asbestos boards stacked up at a mill in Bolton.

The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) took legal action against Hazelwise Ltd and RH Property Management Ltd after finding dozens of damaged asbestos boards stacked up at Brownlow Mill during a visit on 20 October 2010.

Manchester Crown Court heard today (24 August 2012) that neither company had put a plan in place to manage the asbestos in the mill on Tennyson Street, where several small businesses rent units.

HSE became aware of the issue when a contractor on the site raised concerns that asbestos insulation boards had been stripped out of unoccupied floors at the mill, releasing potentially deadly asbestos fibres into the air.

Inspectors issued two Prohibition Notices banning the removal of tools and other items from four floors of the mill in case they had become contaminated with asbestos fibres, and preventing access to the floors.

They also found that asbestos was present in other parts of the mill, occupied by tenants, but nothing had been done to protect it and make sure it was safe.

The court was told the letting agent, RH Property Management Ltd, had raised the issue of the lack of an asbestos assessment in 2006 but did not take any further action. The owner of the mill, Hazelwise Ltd, also failed to arrange for an asbestos survey to be carried out.

Both companies pleaded guilty to a breach of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 for failing to ensure the health and safety of people at the mill. Hazelwise also admitted a breach of the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2006 by failing to properly assess the risks from asbestos at the site.

Hazelwise Ltd, of Mauldeth Avenue in Chorlton, was fined £40,000 and ordered to pay £8,969 in prosecution costs. RH Property Management Ltd, of Greek Street in Stockport, was fined £15,000 and with costs of £11,011.

Speaking after the hearing, HSE Inspector Philip Strickland said:

"Workers at Brownlow Mill have been exposed to potentially deadly fibres because neither company did anything to find out where asbestos was on the site.

"It is a legal requirement for owners and letting agents of commercial properties to carry out an assessment as to whether asbestos is present in a building, and what action is needed to keep it safe.

"If employers don't take the risks from asbestos seriously, then thousands of people will continue to die in the UK every year as a result of breathing in asbestos fibres."

Asbestos boards were commonly used up until the 1980s to help insulate buildings, to build partition walls and as ceiling tiles. The boards only become dangerous if they are broken up and asbestos fibres are released into the air.

Fibres that are breathed in can become lodged in the lungs or digestive tract, and may lead to lung cancer or other diseases if large numbers of fibres are inhaled. However, symptoms may not appear for several decades.

Managing and working with asbestos

 

This information will be of particular interest to employers, asbestos contractors and others with duties under asbestos regulations, together with those workers currently at greatest risk from exposure to asbestos.

The importation, supply and use of all forms of asbestos are banned. However, many buildings, and some plant and equipment, still contain asbestos-containing materials (ACMs).

Before you start any work in a building that might contain asbestos (e.g. built or refurbished before the year 2000), you need to do the following:

1) Identify whether asbestos is present and determine its type and condition:

• People responsible for maintenance of non-domestic premises, have a 'duty to manage' the asbestos in them, and should provide you with information on where any asbestos is in the building and what condition it is in;
• If no information is available or it is limited and you suspect asbestos may be present you should have the area surveyed and representative samples of the material you are going to work on analysed;
• Alternatively, you can assume that any material you need to disturb does contain asbestos and take the appropriate precautions for the highest risk situation.

2) Carry out a risk assessment:

• Decide if its possible to carry out the building or maintenance work avoiding the risk of asbestos exposure all together;
• If that's not possible, identify who might be at risk and the level of possible asbestos exposure from any work;
• On this basis, decide what work methods are necessary to provide effective control of the risks.

3) Decide if the work needs to be carried out by a licensed contractor

• Most asbestos removal work will require a contractor holding a licence from HSE;
• All work with sprayed asbestos coatings and asbestos lagging and most work with asbestos insulation and asbestos insulating board (AIB) requires a licence;
• Identify if your work needs a licensed contractor;
• Find a licensed contractor, or find out how to apply for a licence.

4) If the work is not licensable, decide if the work needs to be notified

• If it doesn't need a licence, you can do maintenance work on or around ACMs with the appropriate controls in place;
• Some non-licensed work also has additional requirements, i.e. notification of work, medical surveillance and record keeping. This work is known as notifiable non-licensed work (NNLW).

5) Ensure those carrying out the work are suitably trained

• Any worker who is liable to disturb asbestos during their day-to-day work needs to receive appropriate training to enable them to protect themselves and others

Firms fined for asbestos failings

  

Two Lincoln companies have been fined after workers were exposed to asbestos during the refurbishment of a Northamptonshire hospital ward.

Contractors Simons Construction Ltd hired Rilmac Insulation Ltd to carry out an asbestos survey for them before work began on Martin Roth ward at St Mary’s Hospital, Kettering. The survey identified an asbestos coating on the underside of the ceilings, but missed over 200 sq metres of asbestos insulation board (AIB) above.

Northampton Magistrates’ Court was told today (28 August) that when two workers contracted to Simons were told to knock holes in the ceilings on 17 December 2009, they were not told it contained asbestos and they disturbed both layers.

Their masks were not the correct type, they were not wearing protective overalls and they were not working in a way that would minimise and contain the release of fibres. Asbestos material landed on their clothes, which they wore for the rest of the day increasing their chances of contamination.

The court heard the workers unwittingly increased the risk to themselves when they swept up the debris and left it in a pile on the floor. It was only discovered when a company contracted to remove the ceilings came onto the ward in January 2010 and recognised the material. A licensed asbestos removal company then spent several weeks removing the ceilings.

An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found that the fully qualified surveyor from Rilmac Insulation Ltd had identified asbestos on the underside of the plasterboard ceiling, which did not need to be removed by licensed contractors, but had failed to identify the layer of AIB above it, which did.

HSE also found the two men carrying out the work for Simons had not been trained to recognise asbestos containing materials or how to work safely with it.

Simons Construction Ltd, of Doddington Road, Lincoln, and Rilmac Insulation Ltd, of Crofton Drive, Allenby Road Industrial Estate, Lincoln, both pleaded guilty to breaching Section 3(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 at Northampton Magistrates’ Court.

Simons Construction Ltd was fined £5,000 and ordered to pay costs of £2,911 while Rilmac Insulation Ltd was fined £3,500 with costs of £2,911.

After the hearing, HSE Inspector Martin Giles said:

"Rilmac failed to properly identify the full extent of asbestos in the ceiling, while Simons, despite knowing from the survey that some was present, failed to provide a safe system of work, to supervise matters sufficiently and to pass on the information it did have adequately to its contractors