Worker Killed in North Sea Support Vessel
In early January 2007, a pipe-fitter died and a rigging foreman was injured while working at sea 72 miles north-east of Aberdeen in the cargo tanks of the support ship “Bleo Holm”, operated by Talisman Energy (UK). The man who died was employed by Aker Kvaerner Offshore Partner Limited. The full circumstances of the accident were not revealed. The “Bleo Holm” is a floating production and storage offloading vessel which operates in several North Sea oil fields.
An investigation team including Grampian Police and the Health and Safety Executive boarded the vessel following the accident.
Another Corus Steel Plant Death
In early January 2007, a Corus worker was killed at a steel plant in Wombourne, near Wolverhampton, when steel plates being loaded onto a crane fell and trapped him. The dead man was employed as a subcontractor by A. Hingley Transport Ltd and worked at the plant loading metal onto the company's vans. Staffordshire Police and the Health and Safety Executive launched a joint inquiry into the incident. Corus has lost nine employees in fatal workplace accidents in the last six years.
Ammonia Leak Incident at Berkshire Brewery
A leakage of ammonia took place at the Scottish and Newcastle brewery plant in Reading on 15th January 2007. Five out of 90 people present onsite were hospitalised after inhaling ammonia fumes, and a section of the M4 motorway around junction 11 was closed overnight. Fire crews and a special chemical unit worked at the brewery to isolate and seal off two leaking valves.
Although classed as a major incident, it was tackled quickly and the released gas soon dispersed due to wind and heavy rain. An HSE investigation was begun into the chemical leak.
HSE Prohibition on Tower Cranes
On 26th September 2006, at a Barratt Homes construction site in Thessaly Road, Battersea, London SW8, there was a tower crane collapse. Two people were killed as a result of the incident, the driver of the crane and a member of the public. The crane involved is owned and was provided by Falcon Crane Hire Ltd and is a BPR saddle jib tower, Model 222.
On 15th January 2007, at a David McClean Ltd construction site in the Elysian Fields development in Liverpool city centre, a JASO J138PA luffing jib crane on hire from Falcon Crane Hire Ltd collapsed and crushed a site worker to death. The crane operator was trapped in his cab for an hour while emergency services used a cherry picker to free him. He was reported to have been taken to hospital suffering from back and shoulder injuries.
Both incidents are the subject of on-going HSE and police investigations and the exact causes of either failure have not been determined. The HSE decided to require the owning company to demonstrate that those cranes which have been thoroughly examined by competent persons employed by them are safe to continue in operation, and on 22nd January 2007 they served a Prohibition Notice on Falcon Crane Hire Ltd of Shipdam, Norfolk, which required them, with immediate effect, to take out of service all tower cranes in their fleet which have not been subject to a thorough examination by an independent competent person.
The Prohibition Notice affected up to 180 tower cranes currently erected on construction sites throughout the UK. Cranes which had already been examined by an independent competent person were not affected by the Notice and could continue in service.
The Lifting Operations and Lifting Equipment Regulations 1998 require tower cranes to be thoroughly examined by a competent person on a periodic basis (six or 12 months depending whether they are used to lift persons) or in accordance with a written scheme of examination. The Regulations do not prohibit the competent person being a member of the company operating the crane. In the guidance issued by the HSE to accompany the Regulations it is recommended that if in-house examiners are employed they should have genuine authority and independence. Another means of ensuring independence is to use the services of an external body.
Crane safety is covered by BS 7121, Code of practice for safe use of cranes, a 14- part series of standards providing a working guide for management and to assist in the training of personnel in safe working practices.
Third Death in Accident-Prone Coal Mine
On 17th January 2007, a contract worker was killed in a coal mine tunnel collapse at Daw Mill Colliery in Arley, Warwickshire. It was the third death at the pit in eight months, the earlier fatalities involving severe head injuries and methane gas exposure. Such a cluster of fatalities under different circumstances in the same pit is an unusual occurrence. The Health and Safety Executive initiated an investigation.
The mine is owned by UK Coal and employs around 500 workers. It is the last remaining operational coal pit in Warwickshire, producing three million tonnes of coal a year.
CHIP and the Export and Import of Dangerous Chemicals
In 1999, the UK became a signatory to the Rotterdam Convention on Prior Informed Consent (PIC), which allows countries to monitor and control the trade and use of certain hazardous chemicals. The importation of certain dangerous chemicals can be refused or conditions may be imposed which must be met.
The European Regulation that implemented the Rotterdam Convention was EC 304/2003. In January 2006, the European Court of Justice annulled Regulation EC 304/2003 because it had an incorrect legal base; but to prevent any confusion regarding the import and export of dangerous chemicals, the provisions of the annulled Regulation were retained until a new Regulation comes into force. Thus the legal duties of an exporter of chemicals outside the EU did not change.
The European Commission has now reviewed Regulation 304/2003/EC and published its proposal for the new Regulation, which member states will discuss and negotiate, after which the European Parliament and Council will consider and vote on the proposal.
The main changes proposed by the Commission are:
- A broader definition of the term “exporter”.
- A new definition of “preparation”.
- An extended “explicit consent procedure”.
- Changes to customs controls.
- A broader legal base.
The UK Designated National Authority for PIC is the HSE Industrial Chemicals Unit based in Bootle, Merseyside.
English Channel Shipwreck Raises Pollution Fears
The 62,000-tonne container ship, “MSC Napoli”, registered in London and owned by the Swiss Mediterranean Shipping Company, developed serious structural cracks in her hull just above the waterline in stormy weather on 18th January 2007. When the engine room flooded and the ship developed a heavy list, the 26-man crew abandoned ship. The vessel was deliberately beached on a sand bar one mile off Branscombe in Devon. She was carrying 2,394 containers, of which 158 were reported by the Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA) to contain hazardous substances, including industrial and agricultural chemicals. The toxic materials were allegedly stored in the hold rather than on deck.
During continuing bad weather more than 200 containers were swept from the ship and floated away; up to 200 tonnes of diesel fuel had leaked from the hulk, creating an eight-kilometre surface oil slick. Salvage operations began by removing 3,500 tonnes of bunker oil, fuel oil and other pollutants. Defuelling was expected to take a week, as the fuel had to be heated before it could be offloaded to a waiting vessel. The MCA said the ship was being surrounded by a one-kilometre boom to protect the sea from pollution.
Under its previous name of “CMA-CGM Normandie”, the “MSC Napoli” ran aground in the Malacca Strait, off Singapore, in 2001, and subsequently had to undergo major repairs in Vietnam. She was last inspected in 2005.
Employer Fined for Failing to Control Vehicle Movements
At Derby Crown Court, Saint Gobain Pipelines of Stanton-by-Dale, Ilkeston, were fined £150,000 with £10,000 costs after an HSE prosecution under the Health and Safety at Work, etc. Act 1974 and the Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992. The case concerned an employee who in December 2004 was run down by a four-tonne rail truck while performing maintenance work on a conveyor belt. He received serious leg and pelvic injuries.
The company did not have proper procedures in place to protect workers from vehicles at the site. Transport movements in the workplace were not planned or organised, nor were there effective physical barriers with appropriate crossing points to eliminate or reduce potential contact between vehicles and pedestrians.
HSWA Challenge in the European Court
In the Spring 2006 Newsletter we reported on two cases under consideration by the European Court of Justice in which the European Commission had taken the UK Government to the Court to clarify whether current UK law complies with EU regulations. One case (C-127/05) concerned the Health and Safety at Work, etc. Act 1974 (HSWA), which underlies all UK health and safety law and which contains the phrase that employers should act to protect the health and safety of their workers “so far as is reasonably practicable”.
The Commission contended that this wording does not go far enough in implementing the EC 1989 Health and Safety Directive. The Directive imposes responsibility on the employer in relation to all events adverse to the health and safety of workers, except in very special circumstances. In contrast, UK legislation permits an employer to “escape responsibility” if it can be proven that the sacrifice involved in taking further measures, whether in cost, time or effort, would be grossly disproportionate to the risk.
Recently the Advocate General, Paolo Mengozzi, who gives non-binding advice to the European Court, said that because the general duty laid down in the Directive does not extend so far as to require the employer to provide a totally risk-free working environment, HSWA does not violate the EU Framework Directive, and the strict interpretation for which the Commission argued in respect of an employer’s duty was wrong. However, it has been pointed out that the Advocate General did not endorse the use of reasonable practicability as a way of assessing whether an employer had complied with his or her duty. The most important criteria are technical feasibility of eliminating or reducing risks, and foreseeability. The UK legal system as a whole deals adequately with liability issues, but Mengozzi did not state that “so far as is reasonably practicable” actually satisfies the Framework Directive requirements.
The European Court has yet to announce whether it will accept the recommendation of the Advocate General, but either way some significant change in UK law remains on the cards.
Domestic Microwave Oven Use in Sterilisation
A paper published in the January 2007 edition of the Journal of Environmental Health by a team of engineering researchers at the University of Florida reports that exposing a well-used kitchen sponge for two minutes inside a domestic microwave oven on full power killed or inactivated more than 99% of the bacteria, viruses or parasites, as well as spores, present on the sponge.
This previously overlooked and simple method of decontamination does not require the use of water or chemical agents. The researchers said they soaked sponges and scrubbing pads in raw wastewater containing faecal bacteria such as E. coli, viruses, protozoan parasites and bacterial spores. Then they used an ordinary kitchen microwave oven to heat the sponges. Ten minutes of exposure were necessary to kill all the spores present, but everything else was killed after two minutes.
Obviously the method cannot be used to sterilise unsuitable materials such as metals or low melting point polymers, but for many utensils and instruments it is ideal.
HSE Technical Alert on Tower Cranes
On 25th January 2007, the HSE issued a technical alert to the construction industry on high tensile bolt connections on tower cranes, made available as supplementary guidance to that contained in BS 7121 Part 2:2003 Code of Practice for Safe Use of Cranes - Inspection, Testing and Examination. Its purpose is to remind those who own, operate and hire tower cranes that they should ensure that high tensile bolt connections, including those on masts, jibs and slew rings of their tower cranes, are correctly installed and pre-loaded (tensioned). Failure to do so could lead to the bolt connection failing, with catastrophic consequences. In brief, those responsible for the installation, thorough examination, inspection, maintenance and operation of tower cranes should ensure that:
- The correct rolled thread high tensile bolt connections are used, as supplied by the original crane manufacturer or from a quality assured vendor to the original manufacturer’s specification.
- High tensile bolt connections are replaced in accordance with the manufacturer’s recommendations, bearing in mind that components should be replaced more frequently in adverse environmental conditions.
- High tensile bolt connection components are not reused unless permitted by the manufacturer. Components continuously immersed in water should not be reused unless subjected to 100% non-destructive testing (NDT) techniques.
- Components to be reused are stored in a dry secure location until required.
- Components are protected against corrosion by a suitable rust inhibitor .
- High tensile bolt connections are cleaned and examined before they are installed, as the fatigue life of components is significantly reduced by surface defects and imperfections.
- High tensile bolt connections are assembled in accordance with the crane manufacturer’s instructions, and the tightening torque applied to the nut rather than the bolt head, unless the manufacturer specifies otherwise. All high tensile bolt connections are to be re-tensioned within the period specified by the manufacturer.
- Newly installed components are protected against corrosion and plastic caps, if specified by the manufacturer, fitted over threads and nuts to exclude water from the threads.
- High tensile bolt connections are inspected and examined regularly in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions.
The document is available online at:
http://www.hse.gov.uk/construction/pdf/cranebolt.pdfHuman Factors in the Management of Major Accident Hazards
The HSE has published an eight-page introduction to human factors in the management of major accident hazards. The discussion is considered highly relevant for major hazard industries, such as chemical processing, refineries, offshore, nuclear and rail, but is also relevant to non-major-hazard industries such as manufacturing and health care.
The document is available online at:
http://www.hse.gov.uk/toolkitintro.pdfLAPC Emissions Data Online
Under the Environmental Protection Act 1990 and its subordinate legislation, industrial processes are divided into two lists:
- Part A processes, which are controlled by the Environment Agency using a system known as Integrated Pollution Control.
- Part B processes, which are controlled by local authorities under the Local Air Pollution Control (LAPC) system.
In order to be allowed to operate, Part B processes must be granted authorisation by the local authority after inspection. Such regulated processes causing air pollution include foundries, paint-spraying operations, crematoria, petrol stations and dry cleaners. It is a legal requirement for a local authority to keep an open register which is easily accessible by the general public. Until January 2007, the information was paper-based, thereby requiring a dedicated journey by a member of the public to gain access.
In January 2007, the London Borough of Hillingdon became the first council to launch an online register holding information on emissions, allowing unlimited public access to permits, inspection reports and other information on industrial sites in their area.
The URL is:
http://www.emissions.hillingdon.gov.ukConstruction Company Fined after Unsupported Floor Collapse
At Huyton Magistrates’ Court, a construction company, Harron Homes (North West) Ltd, was fined £18,000 and ordered to pay costs of £4,210 after pleading guilty to a breach of Section 3(1) of the Health and Safety at Work, etc. Act 1974.
The prosecution by the HSE followed an incident in October 2004 at the Park Meadow construction site in Kirkby, Merseyside. Four contract employees in a bricklaying gang suffered minor injuries when the first floor of the two-storey house in which they were working collapsed. The floor was supported by joists fixed to one side of the building by metal joist hangers, which had not been installed according to the manufacturer’s instructions, and the hangers were not adequately built into the brickwork. The floor was not supported from below with props and the weight of the men and the concrete blocks stacked there for use in the building work overloaded the floor.
The HSE commented that house builders and others who use joist hangers should make sure that they have carried out an adequate assessment of the risks associated with using joist hangers in the particular buildings they are working on. A suitable and sufficient risk assessment, taking account of manufacturers’ instructions, should enable them to develop safe systems of work. Those working on construction sites of this type should be fully informed of the safe systems of work to follow.
Recovery of Workplace Injury Costs
On 29th January 2007, the NHS Injury Costs Recovery (ICR) scheme came into force. It will enable the NHS to claim back over £150 million a year for treating employees who are injured at work. The scheme applies in England, Wales and Scotland.
A fixed-rate tariff has been introduced which covers ambulance journeys, hospital treatment, admission or follow-up appointments directly relating to any injury for which compensation is received. The NHS can claim back treatment costs up to £37,100 per case.
The ICR scheme, which will be administered on behalf of the Government by the Compensation Recovery Unit, is almost certain to result in higher costs in terms of employers’ liability insurance. It has been estimated that the NHS will recover between £200 million and £250 million a year from employment liability insurers.
The Health Minister said that the scheme was based on the legal rights of the NHS and the responsibilities of those to blame. It is hoped it will act as an additional impetus to improving health and safety. He said that it is unacceptable that taxpayers have to pay for the medical treatment of someone injured at work simply because employers fail to take adequate steps to protect their workforce.
New Guidance on Construction Electrical Safety
A new guidance leaflet on safe isolation practices for construction site electrical safety has been produced by the Electrical Safety Council (ESC) in collaboration with the HSE. The guide stresses that electrical installers should not condone unsafe working practices such as energising circuits before electrical installation is completed, a practice sometimes carried out for the convenience of building designers, clients, main contractors and/or finishing trades, and which is usually illegal.
The Health and Safety at Work, etc. Act 1974 sets out the general health and safety duties of employers, employees and the self-employed. The Electricity at Work Regulations 1989 require precautions to be taken against the risk of death or personal injury from electricity in work activities. Duties are placed on employers to ensure that employees engaged in work activities on or near electrical equipment implement safe systems of work, have the technical knowledge, training or experience to carry out the work safely, and are provided with suitable tools, test equipment and personal protective equipment. Employees are required to co-operate with their employer to enable the requirements of the Regulations to be met, including complying with any instructions given on such matters as safe systems of work.
Regulation 14 of the Electricity at Work Regulations 1989 concerns work on or near live circuits where there is a risk of touching live conductors, such work being permissible only where certain conditions are met.
It is essential from the outset that effective management and control of the system, apparatus and equipment used on site is achieved and maintained, thereby ensuring that the hazards and risks which can arise are minimised.
An authorised person should be appointed with responsibility for the supervision of the installation of switchgear, equipment, cables, jointing, etc. throughout the contract. The authorised person should also have responsibility for the safe working practices of workers, as well as the control of appointed subcontractors. Subcontractors must provide appropriate method statements and risk assessments for their work.
The authorised person may delegate in writing his or her authority in total, or for specific tasks and procedures, to competent persons having appropriate training and competence in the performance of those tasks and procedures.
The ESC guidance is available at: http://www.electricalsafetycouncil.org.uk/pdf/ElecSafConst3-10-06.pdf
Industrial Injuries Disablement Benefit Review
On 29th January 2007, the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) announced an official consultation and review of the state-funded Industrial Injuries Disablement Benefit (IIDB) scheme, which provides non-contributory benefits for disablement where disability has arisen from an accident at work or as a result of an occupational disease. It is a ‘no-fault’ scheme under which employees who are injured or made ill through work do not have to demonstrate that the employer was negligent. The scheme was first introduced in 1948 when 61% of UK employment was in heavy industry.
At present there are 350,000 people receiving IIDB/REA (Reduced Earnings Allowance) in the UK at a cost of £776 million. Just over half of current claimants are of working age (53%), and around one in five claimants are women. The Government wants to improve and extend the scope of the occupational injury and disease benefits system.
The present scheme has strict limitations based on disability level and applies only to a limited list of prescribed industrial diseases; and it has other specified restrictions which render many victims of workplace injury and occupational disease ineligible for compensation. Today around 70% of the workforce are employed in office and service occupations, with female employees now making up half the total.
The DWP wants to address such issues as 'no-fault' occupational injuries and diseases; who should be covered by a new occupational injury scheme; and the extent to which employers should be obliged to reduce the risks of work-related accidents and illness.
The consultation document (size 348 KB) can be downloaded from: http://www.dwp.gov.uk/publications/dwp/2007/IIDB.pdf
Scottish Local Authorities Warned to be Proactive
In September 2006, Dundee City Council appealed against an improvement notice served on them by the HSE at an employment tribunal, which after consideration upheld the HSE action. The HSE had served the notice after its appraisal that the Council had an inadequate management system and provisions in place to deal effectively with occupational health risks.
At the end of January 2007, the HSE issued an alert to warn local authorities in Scotland to be proactive in identifying and addressing health and safety issues affecting their staff.
The legal duty to provide occupational health provisions for staff is outlined in a range of regulations, including the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations which state that employers have a duty to carry out risk assessments, make health and safety arrangements to manage risks, and ensure staff have access to competent health and safety advice.
Dundee City Council has subsequently put into force a comprehensive action plan.
New Guidance on Genetically Modified Organisms
The Scientific Advisory Committee on Genetic Modification (SACGM) has issued a new compendium of guidance, prepared in consultation with the HSE. The guidance represents what is considered to be good practice by the members of the Committee. It has been agreed by the HSC. Following the guidance is not compulsory and other action may be taken, but following the guidance will normally be considered compliance with the law. Health and safety inspectors seek to secure compliance with the law and may refer to this guidance as illustrating good practice.
The guidance is available as a series of downloadable PDF files from the following URL: HSE Biosafety SACGM
New Guidance on Landfill Waste
The Environment Agency has published new guidance on the latest phased changes introduced under the Landfill (England and Wales) Regulations 2002, which come into force on 30th October 2007. The changes mean that waste must be treated before it is disposed of at a landfill site, and liquid waste will be banned from any landfill. The purpose of waste treatment is to encourage the recycling of waste and reduce the environmental impact of waste sent to landfill.
Earlier requirements of the Regulations were a ban on the co-disposal of hazardous waste with non-hazardous waste in landfills, effective from July 2004; and a ban on the landfill of whole tyres from 2003, and of shredded tyres from July 2006.
Part A of the new guidance, Treatment of Non-Hazardous Wastes for Landfill, explains the requirements of the Regulations and Part B provides suggested methods on how to deal with certain wastes.
Construction Waste Management Plans
From next year, construction companies will be obliged by law to have Site Waste Management Plans (SWMPs) providing a structure for the systematic management of waste at all stages of project delivery. SWMPs were developed originally as a DTI Voluntary Code of Practice, but in April 2008 they will become a legal requirement under the Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Act 2005 for all construction projects valued at greater than £250,000. The enforcing agencies are the local authorities and the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.
The impact is likely to be considerable, as an estimated 13 million tonnes of unused building materials are discarded by sites as waste every year. Compliance will result in significant cost savings for the industry, while non-compliance will result in a fine.
The purpose of an onsite SWMP is to identify:
- An individual responsible for resource management.
- The different types of waste that will be produced.
- Resource management options for the wastes (waste minimisation, reuse, recycling or recovery).
- The use of appropriate and licensed waste management contractors.
- A plan for monitoring and recording resource use and the quantities of waste produced.
Progress of the Corporate Manslaughter Bill
The Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Bill has been consistently delayed for nearly ten years. In a debate on the Bill held on 5th February 2007, the House of Lords voted by 223 to 127 to permit the prosecution of prison governors for negligent deaths of prisoners in custody, and of the police for negligent deaths in police cells.
This move went against the wishes of the Government, which had excluded such deaths from the new legislation, arguing that current provisions over deaths in custody are sufficient. It was reported that in response the Government had threatened to abandon the legislation, in breach of the 2005 Warwick agreement with the trade unions in which the Government pledged to pass certain pieces of legislation.
However, the Government subsequently relented and pledged to consult on the way forward.
Granite Company Employee Fatally Crushed
Just Granite Limited of Penkridge was fined a total of £10,000, with costs of £4,470.80, after pleading guilty at an HSE prosecution heard in Stafford Magistrates' Court on 1st February 2007. The case concerned a lorry driver from the Czech Republic who was fatally crushed when more than six tonnes of granite slabs fell on him in November 2005 at the Just Granite Ltd site at Pillaton Hall Farm, Pillaton, Penkridge, Stafford.
The death was found to be the result of a failure to take practicable precautions to control the risks associated with the unloading of vehicles that contained granite slabs. The company pleaded guilty to a breach of Section 3(1) of the Health and Safety at Work, etc. Act 1974, and Regulation 3(1) of the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999.
Increase in Workplace Assaults on Schoolteachers
Figures obtained from the Department for Work and Pensions by a Liberal Democrat MP reveal that in 2006 there were 221violent assaults on schoolteachers by their pupils. There were in total 1,128 attacks between 2000 and 2006. The figures show the number of injuries caused by violent attacks increased by 20% over the same period. The number of injuries resulting in the victim requiring three or more days off work rose by 29%. The largest number of assaults were reported in Preston, Rotherham, South Derbyshire, Bradford, Ealing and Purbeck.
The rise in the level of violence to which employees are exposed in schools is paralleled by patient assaults on hospital accident and emergency staff, and customer assaults on shop workers and public transport staff.
Monsanto Toxic Waste Legacy
In 1965, the American chemical giant Monsanto became aware that its manufacturing plant in Newport, South Wales, was causing widespread environmental contamination with polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) produced for use mainly as flame retardants and insulators. Monsanto paid contractors to dump thousands of tonnes of highly toxic chemical waste in local landfill sites, knowing the substances were liable to contaminate wildlife and people. The Newport plant is now owned by a subsidiary named Solutia.
In early January 2007, the Environment Agency Wales (EAW) launched an inquiry after the dumped chemicals were found to be polluting groundwater and atmosphere some 30 years after disposal. The site in question is the Brofiscin quarry on the outskirts of Groesfaen, near Cardiff, where nine cows died of poisoning on an adjacent farm in 1972, and from where fumes erupted over a wide area in 2003. According to a UK government report, some 67 substances, including dioxins and PCBs which could only have been sourced from Monsanto, are leaking from one unlined porous quarry that was not authorised to take chemical wastes. The EAW has estimated that it could cost up to £100 million to clean the site, described as one of the most contaminated in the country. The EAW has spent £800,000 investigating the contents of the site and regards it as a priority to remediate because it is so close to habitation. The groundwater pollution is not thought to present an immediate danger to human health.
Monsanto had carried out LD50 tests on PCBs and derivatives in 1953 using rats and knew the exposure risks, but continued to manufacture PCBs and to dispose of the wastes in South Wales until 1977, more than a decade after evidence of widespread contamination of humans and the environment was beyond dispute. The company ceased producing PCBs in the US in 1971 but the UK government, which knew of the dangers of PCBs in the environment in the 1960s, allowed their continued production in Wales until 1977.
Monsanto announced that it is handling issues related to the historical manufacture of PCBs in Wales and continuing to work with the Wales Department of Environment and other regulatory bodies to resolve the issues. The company maintains that, under its former name of Pharmacia, it did inform its contractors of the nature of wastes prior to disposal, and did not dump wastes from its own vehicles.
Council Worker Wins Vibration White Finger Compensation Claim
In a case supported by the trade union UNISON, a road worker was awarded £42,000 following injuries caused by exposure to vibrating tools. The man was an employee of Derbyshire County Council for many years, and repeated exposure to vibrating tools caused him to suffer from carpal tunnel syndrome and vibration white finger.
Throughout his employment by the Council he was never provided with adequate protective equipment or medical surveillance. Derbyshire County Council showed a lack of awareness of the potential implications of his condition and continued to employ him in areas where he was exposed to vibration and repetitive cycle work.
At Manchester County Court the employee was awarded £11,000 for pain and suffering, and £31,000 to compensate him for future loss of earnings.
Each year, approximately 3,000 new claims for Industrial Injury Disablement Benefit are made in relation to vibration white finger and vibration-related carpal tunnel syndrome. Under the Control of Vibration at Work Regulations 2005 employers have a duty to assess and identify measures to eliminate or reduce risks from exposure to hand-arm vibration.
Employer Fined for Slurry Tank Deaths
On 15th February 2007, Enviro-Waste Ltd and its two senior managers were fined a total of £92,500 at Norwich Crown Court after an HSE prosecution concerning the deaths of three workers in a slurry tank. The company pleaded guilty to breaching Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work, etc. Act 1974 (HSWA) in that it failed to manage the risks of slurry holding tanks. It was fined £72,500 and ordered to pay £50,000 costs. The company’s General Manager and its Director both pleaded guilty to breaching Section 37(1) of HSWA and were each ordered to pay fines of £10,000.
In evidence it was stated that while engaged on cleaning the tank, the field manager accidentally entered an area which contained dangerously high levels of carbon dioxide and low oxygen. When he was overcome, two colleagues attempted to rescue him but were also overcome in the lethal atmosphere. All three men died after drowning in a one-metre depth of slurry.
Their employer, Enviro-Waste, had failed to provide a safe working environment for its workers and had no risk assessments in place, no slurry tank cleaning procedures, no rescue guidelines, and had a wholly inadequate staff training regime. The waste container in which the accident occurred was also missing several safety features that would have prevented entry.
The HSE commented that proper precautions must always be taken at all times for confined space work. There should be no entry unless absolutely necessary. If entry is necessary, there must be a fully trained staff, a documented system of work, atmospheric monitoring and emergency rescue arrangements. Guidance on work in confined spaces is available at:
http://www.hse.gov.uk/confinedspace/index.htmFollowing media criticism, the judge issued a statement in which he said that in fixing the level of fines, this being the only penalty available, he had to take into account ability to pay and pointed out that the fine and costs were almost all of Enviro-Waste's £150,000 profit from last year.
Chemical Accidents in the UK
A report surveying chemical accidents was published by the Health Protection Agency in mid-February 2007. The findings state that in the year 2005 there were 1,040 accidents (a 30% increase on the previous year) involving potentially harmful chemical spillages, leaks and explosions which put up to 27,000 people at risk of injury. More than 3,000 people suffered adverse effects, including poisoning and burns from contamination.
Industrial incidents accounted for 21% of the total and involved a diverse range of substances, including mercury, asbestos, carbon monoxide and pesticides. Leakages of flammable substances accounted for 27% of accidents, and 7% involved dangerous metals. Asbestos was involved in 5% of accidents and cyanides 1%. There was an increase in corrosive acids spilt in industrial settings.
A further 15% of accidents were described as commercial, 8% in the open air and 8% on transport systems. Educational and academic institutions accounted for 7%, and the NHS 5%. Equally disturbing was the fact that 19% of all accidents were classed as domestic.
The incidents reported ranged from the disastrous explosion at the Buncefield oil depot in Hertfordshire to domestic spills of mercury from thermometers and home explosions of liquid heating fuels.
The total number of deaths attributable directly to chemical exposure is difficult to estimate due to the difficulty of monitoring longer-term exposure effects from carcinogens and neurotoxins.
In a more detailed study of 152 accidents, the investigation found that 85,000 people lived within 250 metres and 1.3 million within a kilometre of the accident sites. In 14% of the studied cases the area was evacuated. The highest density of accidents took place in London and Birmingham, the most densely populated areas.
UK Multinationals Fail to Declare Total Carbon Emissions
A report published in mid-February 2007 by Christian Aid, Coming Clean: Revealing the UK’s True Carbon Footprint, suggests that millions of tonnes of greenhouse gases produced by some of the major UK companies are not being declared, because of a lack of mandatory standards regulating the way in which businesses report their greenhouse gas emissions. Nearly 200 million tonnes of carbon dioxide, equivalent to around 30% of the UK currently declared annual emissions, is not accounted for in the annual reports of major companies listed in the FTSE 100 index on the London Stock Exchange. The report states that this represents only a small fraction of total undeclared emissions.
Globally the activities of FTSE 100 companies emit an estimated 12% to 15% of worldwide carbon emissions, in contradiction to a UK Government claim that the UK produces around 2% of global carbon emissions.
Although international standards for reporting greenhouse gas emissions exist, abiding by them is optional unless a company is part of the European Emissions Trading Scheme. Since most businesses are not obliged to reveal their emissions, they are inclined to report either none or only part of their total emissions, giving a distorted picture. For example, Marks and Spencer declared 5 million tonnes of CO2 emissions, which is more than twice as much as declared by its larger rival Tesco. The discrepancy is caused by Marks and Spencer including its global supply chain and customer journeys when calculating its carbon footprint, whereas Tesco does not.
Christian Aid found that only 16 out of the 100 companies on the FTSE 100 index properly report their basic emissions according to established standards, as backed by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. If all members of the FTSE 100 applied those standards to their emissions reports, it is estimated that these companies would have to declare a further 190.65 million tonnes of carbon.
The Environment Agency has stated that four out of five of the first 100 companies in the FTSE All-Share index to report under the Business Review requirement of the European Union Accounts Modernisation Directive have failed to disclose environmental performance indicators.
Under-Reporting of Workplace Accidents under RIDDOR
In mid-February 2007, the HSE published the findings of a study into the under-reporting of accidents under the Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations 1995 (RIDDOR) by matching patients attending the Royal Liverpool University Hospital with cases reported to the HSE. The largest number of reportable accidents was from occupations connected with the construction industry. Sales assistants and unqualified nursing assistants were also prominent. Reporting rates varied between sectors, with the highest reporting rate from local and central government and the three lowest from catering/repairs, distribution/hotels and other manufacturing.
The comparison with accidents actually reported to the HSE suggested that the main reason accidents were reported was time lost from work, and other factors were ancillary. Major injury and reduced duties on their own were largely ignored when accidents were reported, but major injury in conjunction with time lost increased the likelihood that accidents would be reported.
Overall 30% of reportable accidents from the study were reported to the HSE. Self- employed workers were poor at reporting accidents, with a reporting rate of 12%, compared with 32% for employed workers. HSE Report number RR528 is available online at:
http://www.hse.gov.uk/research/rrhtm/rr528.htmCouncil Fined for Injuries to Teenage Employee
In mid-February 2007, Bradford Council was ordered to pay £13,228 in fines and costs at Bradford Magistrates' Court after an HSE prosecution for failing to ensure the safety of a young contract worker who suffered burns to his hands when methane gas ignited on a landfill site in September 2005. The teenager was allowed to carry out welding work at a council waste tip in an atmosphere known to be flammable. Fortunately the gas seepage and fire were localised, or more serious consequences might have ensued.
Faulty Boiler Installation Left Three Dead
In a multiple manslaughter case heard at the Old Bailey in London, an unqualified handyman who installed a faulty boiler admitted causing the deaths of a woman and her two young grandsons, and unlawfully wounding two others in the house, including the children's mother who suffered brain damage. The accused also pleaded guilty to offences under health and safety law.
During the installation of a domestic boiler, the man failed to fit an extractor pipe to the appliance at the East London home in April 2006, and a few days later most of the family were found dead from carbon monoxide poisoning. The accused claimed he told the family not to use the appliance, but they ignored his advice. He was sentenced to 20 months in prison.
Full Inquiry to be Held into Mersey Ship Collision
In mid-February 2007, the Marine Accident Investigation Branch (MAIB) completed a preliminary inquiry into a collision on the River Mersey on 3rd February 2007 between a high-speed passenger ferry, the “Sea Express One”, and a cargo ship, the “Alaska Rainbow”. The “Sea Express One” was travelling from the Isle of Man to Liverpool and collided with the “Alaska Rainbow” in fog, close to the Alfred Dock in Liverpool.
None of the 294 passengers on board the Isle of Man Steam Packet Company vessel were injured, but the ship suffered serious structural damage and began to sink. An operation was launched to pump water from the ferry, which has since been moved to a shipyard for repairs.
The MAIB said that a full investigation was necessary to establish the cause of the collision.
Agenda for EU Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions
At the first meeting of the European Commission Environment Council, held on 20th February 2007, ministers agreed to adopt binding targets to cut greenhouse gas emissions to 20% below 1990 levels by 2020.
The decision still requires approval by the governments of European Union member states, but reflects European Commission determination to enforce an international agreement to replace the Kyoto protocol, which expires in 2012. Binding targets which force countries to limit their emissions of greenhouse gases are seen as crucial to such a post-Kyoto treaty. The overall reduction would be shared among member states, allowing some new eastern European member states to make smaller overall emissions cuts.
The 15 states that were members of the EU before its recent expansion are already collectively bound by the Kyoto protocol to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 8% by 2012, compared to 1990 levels.
Emergency Workers (Obstruction) Act 2006
The Emergency Workers (Obstruction) Act 2006 came into force on 20th February 2007 in England and Wales and makes it a criminal offence for anyone to deliberately obstruct a worker responding to an emergency situation. Offenders can be prosecuted and may be fined up to £5,000. The emergency workers covered under the Act include fire-fighters; ambulance workers; people transporting blood, organs or equipment on behalf of the NHS; coastguards; and lifeboat crews.
Police and prison officers are not included as there is already a separate law protecting them from obstruction. However, the new legislation does not cover all health workers dealing with incidents as part of their duties.
The Scottish Parliament introduced the Emergency Workers (Scotland) Act in May 2005 which made assaulting a member of the emergency services a specific offence, with offenders facing up to nine months in prison or a £5,000 fine. Fire crews in Northern Ireland are already protected under the Fire and Rescue Services Order 2006.
The Grayrigg Train Crash
In a near repeat of the circumstances causing the Potters Bar train crash, a London to Glasgow express operated by Virgin Trains was derailed in Cumbria at a set of points in Grayrigg, about six kilometres north-east of Kendal. The Pendalino tilting train was carrying around 110 passengers and travelling at 90 mph when it left the track and nine coaches rolled down an embankment. One passenger died in the crash and 20 others suffered injuries. The incident took place in the early morning of 23rd February 2007. The train, built by Alstom in Birmingham, was of a robust design which may have helped to reduce the number of casualties.
An initial report from the Rail Accident Investigation Branch (RAIB online at http://http://www.raib.gov.uk/cms_resources/
070226_I012007_Grayrigg.pdf
) states that faults with the points meant the tilting train could not follow its intended path over the tracks and derailed. Preliminary site inspection of the points after the incident revealed that the switch rails had one stretcher bar missing, securing bolts and a lock bar on a second were not in place, a third stretcher had a pre-existing fracture, and a fourth appeared to have been fractured in the accident. Stretcher bars resemble long studs and are bolted across the moving rails to keep them a fixed distance apart from each other.
Network Rail was responsible for track maintenance and apologised to the people affected by the failure of the infrastructure. Initially it was unclear whether or not contractors were involved in work on the points. Later it was revealed that on 21st February a machine used to record track defects had taken video footage of the points, which showed that the front stretcher bar was missing. However, the footage was not examined until after the crash. Network Rail said that such records were not reviewed as a matter of routine. Other sources suggested that unauthorised and unrecorded maintenance work may have been carried out after the last official check of the points on 15th February, and during that work the stretcher bar had been dismantled and not replaced.
Railway engineering work is still fragmented and the adequacy of Network Rail's management systems has been called into question. Technical investigations into the accident are likely to take some time.
New Fire Safety Standards
The BSI has announced the following new standards:
- BS EN 3-8:2006, Portable fire extinguishers. Additional requirements to EN 3-7 for the construction, resistance to pressure and mechanical tests for extinguishers with a maximum allowable pressure equal to or lower than 30 bar. This standard specifies the rules of design, type testing, fabrication and inspection control of portable fire extinguishers manufactured with metallic bodies, so far as pressure risk is concerned. It applies to portable fire extinguishers of which the maximum allowable pressure PS is lower than or equal to 30 bar and containing non-explosive, non-flammable, non-toxic and non-oxidising fluids.
- BS EN 3-9:2006, Portable fire extinguishers. Additional requirements to EN 3-7 for pressure resistance of CO2 extinguishers. The standard specifies the rules of design, assembling, inspection and testing of CO2 portable fire extinguishers, so far as the pressure risk is concerned.
BS EN 3-8:2006 and BS EN 3-9:2006 replace BS EN 3-3:1996, which has now been withdrawn.
Lack of Safe System of Work Caused Employee’s Death
In a case brought by Halton Borough Council, Exel UK pleaded guilty at Runcorn Magistrates’ Court to breaches of the Health and Safety at Work, etc. Act 1974 and was fined more than £33,000, including costs. The prosecution followed an incident in April 2004, when the company was known as Tibbett and Britten, in which a warehouse forklift truck driver died after being crushed by a half-tonne bale of plastic which fell from an HGV trailer he was helping to unload.
The court was told that loads had fallen from trailers before, and restraint straps were not always used correctly to stabilise loads. The company had undertaken risk assessments and had produced a safe system of work, but it had not been implemented and employees had not been formally trained in its practice. In addition, the safe system of work was not comprehensive in that it failed to explain how unsafe loads should be dealt with and failed to specify how unsafe loads could be identified. The company had no definition of what constituted an unsafe load.
The court ruled that the company had failed to maintain a safe system of work by having no written company procedure for dealing with unsafe loads.
Steel Stockholder Fined £100,000 for Fatal Accident
On 26th February 2007, the specialist steel stockholder Interpipe of Dudley was fined a total of £100,000 at Wolverhampton Crown Court after pleading guilty to breaches of Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work, etc. Act 1974; and of Regulation 5(1) of the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999.
The prosecution was brought by Dudley Council after an employee died in February 2005 when he was crushed under a five-tonne stack of steel which fell on him. The man had climbed onto freestanding steel stacks stored in U-framed racks to place a wooden baton in between steel bundles. The racks were too wide to adequately support the steel within them, and the stack collapsed on him.
The court found that the company had systematically failed to ensure the safety of their employees, in that they failed to have safe systems of work in place for handling steel; and they had failed to properly plan and organise steel deliveries and storage.
HSE Consultative Document on Petrol Storage Depots
Following the Buncefield incident, the HSE published in late February 2007 a consultative document (coded CD211) on proposals for a revision of policies for HSE advice on development and control around large-scale petrol storage depots. The document outlines the background to the land use planning system around major hazards sites and then considers the Buncefield incident and its implications for land use planning.
The main questions posed are whether current HSE land use planning objectives and principles remain a sound basis for advice, and whether the area in which the HSE apply their land use planning advice should be extended in the light of changed assumptions about the vulnerability of individuals who are likely to be affected.
The ConDoc presents a number of options for consideration for balancing the risks to individuals and public protection against social and economic development.
Call for Action over Young Worker Deaths
A news release by IOSH in early March 2007 drew attention to the need for a Parliamentary debate and Government action over the number of deaths and injuries sustained by young people in the workplace. In the past ten years, 14,500 teenagers have been seriously injured at work and 66 killed. IOSH has produced a six-point action plan, Putting Young Workers First, designed to help prevent unnecessary deaths and injuries.
Echoing these concerns, 89 MPs across all parties signed Early Day Motion 254, “Protecting Young People in the Workplace”, which calls on the Government to make the Workplace Hazard Awareness course for year 10 pupils, developed by IOSH and the Health and Safety Executive, a mandatory part of every curriculum.
Government Abandons Free English Courses for Migrant Workers
In early March 2007, the Government announced that it was planning to restrict access to free English language classes for migrant workers, a proposal likely to lead to increased accident risks at work, and associated risks to third parties. From August 2007 there will be no universal entitlement to free English for Speakers of Other Languages courses, and only those who are unemployed or receiving benefits will be entitled to such free courses.
Examples of the language communication barrier include the Chinese cockle pickers who died in Morecambe Bay, who were unable to use their mobile phones to call for emergency assistance due to their inability to speak English. More recently a Manchester bus company had its operating licence withdrawn when an investigation into a fatal accident revealed that many of the company's migrant drivers had little or no English and had not been trained to understand the Highway Code or basic instructions.
The Government claims that employers should provide the necessary training, as required by law, but is well aware that they often fail to do so.
Employers have a duty under the Health and Safety at Work, etc. Act 1974 to ensure the safety, so far as reasonably practicable, of all of their workers. Guidance Paragraph 64 to Regulation 10 of the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 points out the need for employers to make special arrangements for migrant workers, such as translating information into the migrant workers' first language.
Approved Code of Practice, Paragraph 80 to Regulation 13 of the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 requires that employers should take account of workers' capabilities and their level of training, knowledge and experience. They must also review the capabilities of their employees to carry out their work, and provide any additional training that may be necessary.
Accident figures demonstrate that migrant workers experience higher levels of workplace accidents, often through working longer hours, and have limited understanding of health and safety issues. Migrants are more likely to take up work in sectors for which they have not been trained or had work experience in. Many employers do not check on their suitability, provide training or appropriate PPE. It is also known from statistical data that employees are far more likely to be injured at work during their first month in a new job than at any other period.
The HSE has made available downloadable resources for employers on communicating health and safety principles to migrant workers, translated into many languages, accessible through the following URL:
http://www.hse.gov.uk/languages/index.htm?ebul=hsegen/11-sep-06&cr=06Inadequate Training Leads to Court Fine
In early March 2007, SFJ Ltd of Bangor in North Wales were fined £15,000 and ordered to pay costs of £7,500 at Caernarfon Crown Court after pleading guilty to breaching Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work, etc. Act 1974, relating to an employer's responsibility to ensure the safety of their employees.
The prosecution followed an incident in February 2005 in which one of their employees was injured. The man was assisting with the unloading of a cement mixer from the back of a pick-up truck. His supervisor was not adequately trained to operate the 3600 excavator being used to lift the cement mixer from the vehicle on which it was loaded. The worker was lifted into the air along with the cement mixer and he fell, sustaining injuries which led to paralysis.
The HSE commented that the case demonstrated the importance of proper training in the use of machinery of any kind, and provided a reminder that it can be extremely dangerous to fall even from a relatively low height.
Guidance on the WEEE Regulations
In early March 2007, the Department for Trade and Industry (DTI) published guidance on the Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) Regulations, which came into force on 2nd January 2007. The DTI will establish an independent WEEE advisory body to be responsible for making recommendations for future improvements to the guidance. The main requirements and obligations on producers and distributors of electrical and electronic equipment (EEE) will come into effect from 1st July 2007.
Under the Regulations, producers, manufacturers, importers and resellers will be made directly responsible for financing the cost of the collection, treatment, recycling and recovery of the WEEE they generate. Retailers will face ‘take-back’ obligations. The Regulations also have implications for local authorities, who receive household WEEE deposited by local residents at their civic amenity sites or via waste transfer stations, and/or make bulky waste collections from local residents.
The guidance explains the roles of those involved with any stage of WEEE and lays out what is expected of designated collection points for waste appliances, approved authorised treatment facilities, approved exporters and reprocessors. Guidance on treatment processes is separate as it falls under the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA).
Producer compliance schemes will apply to any waste equipment purchased after 13th August 2005. Consumers and businesses will have to keep records of who they buy their electronic equipment from in order for the process to work. Equipment purchased before 13th August 2005 may fall under the Regulations if it is being replaced by new similar products. If older equipment is not being replaced, it is the responsibility of the individual or business to pay for sending it for recycling or disposal.
Producers must join a Producer Compliance Scheme by 15th March 2007 and pay a registration fee in order to finance the collection, reprocessing and sound environmental disposal of waste equipment. Those who miss the deadline will fail to comply with the first WEEE compliance period, which will run from 1st July until 31st December 2007. In March 2007, some 37 compliance schemes had been approved by the Environment Agency and Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA).
From 1st April 2007, producers must ensure that all EEE placed on the market after this date is appropriately marked with the crossed-out wheelie bin, date code and producer mark.
The DTI Guidance to the WEEE Regulations, Code URN 07/619, is online at: http://www.dti.gov.uk/files/file37923.pdf
Awareness of the WEEE Regulations is lacking at present, particularly among smaller enterprises, although the guidance states clearly that there are no exemptions for SMEs under the WEEE Directive, and hence the WEEE Regulations apply to all businesses regardless of size. It also states that distributors of EEE have responsibilities in terms of the provision of facilities to enable the free take-back of household WEEE by final holders or end users and the provision of certain information to consumers of EEE.
NHS Trust Fined following Visitor Death
South West London and St George's Mental Health Trust were fined £7,500 and ordered to pay £3,694 costs at City of London Magistrates’ Court on 5th March 2007 for breaching Section 3(1) of the Health and Safety at Work, etc. Act 1974.
The Trust was prosecuted after an 88-year-old man fell during a visit to Springfield University Hospital in London SW17. The incident took place in December 2005, when the man, who had been visiting his daughter in the hospital, fell as he was leaving the hospital grounds. He suffered a fractured hip and wrist, and died a month later under hospital care.
After the case had been heard, the HSE warned the NHS to maintain its properties effectively and to put in place a properly thought out and effective maintenance regime for its properties, to ensure the safety of staff, patients and the visiting public alike.
Chemical Spillage in Essex
On 14th March 2007, more than 20 fire-fighters had to contain a major chemical spill on an industrial estate in Hadleigh. Around 1,000 litres of hydrochloric acid, creosote and an unidentified liquid leaked out at the premises of Suffolk and Essex Supplies Ltd on the Lady Lane estate. The company supplies cleaning products for the food industry, swimming pools and spa baths. Fire crews wearing breathing apparatus and chemical protection suits washed some of the liquid into a holding tank. No injuries were reported.
Balfour Beatty Fined for Electrocution Death
Balfour Beatty Rail Infrastructure Services pleaded guilty to breaches of health and safety legislation at Winchester Crown Court and was fined £180,000 with court costs of £73,602.41. The case followed the death by electrocution of a rail worker near Basingstoke in August 2003.
The employee was part of a gang repairing conductor rail insulator pots on the tracks on the London to Winchester line, and was working for Balfour Beatty as a contractor from McGinley Recruitment Services. He was electrocuted when he bridged the conductor and running rails.
An investigation into the incident revealed that the gang was working without any direction, supervision or control; the work was being carried out on a live railway line without the men using protective gloves; there was no system of formal training in place; no risk assessment had been drawn up to show the dangers of the work; no method statement was available; and the only instructions available were hopelessly inadequate. The company had many previous convictions for breaches of health and safety legislation for which it had received substantial fines.
Butcher’s Shop Failed to Protect Young Worker
In a local authority prosecution at Bedford Magistrates’ Court, the two proprietors of Piggotts Family Butchers of Biggleswade were fined £2,000 with £992 costs for health and safety breaches after an incident in June 2006 in which a teenage employee suffered second degree burns when a meat boiler was knocked over, spilling boiling water over his feet, causing injuries that required skin grafts as part of his treatment.
The meat boiler had been moved from its original location for cleaning and placed on an inverted cooking tray, where it had been used to cook meat. It tipped over and spilled boiling water across the floor of the premises. The manager admitted having forgotten to secure the boiler because he was busy.
It was found that the firm had failed to have suitable health and safety procedures in place to protect employees, and had failed to carry out a proper risk assessment.
REACH Enforcement Consultation Published
The EU Registration, Evaluation and Authorisation of Chemicals (REACH) Regulation will come into force on 1st June 2007 and will not require transposition into UK law. Each member state must set up a system of controls and penalties for breaches of the requirements of the Regulation and take the necessary measures to implement those penalties. Article 126 of REACH requires that the penalties which member states create are “effective, proportionate and dissuasive”. An enforcement and penalties regime must be in place no later than 1st December 2008.
A consultation document on proposals for the enforcement of REACH in the UK was published in March 2007. The ConDoc considers who should carry out enforcement of the requirements of REACH; the powers necessary to obtain information, carry out inspections, collect evidence, issue enforcement notices, etc.; and the level and type of penalties for legislative breaches. The consultation closing date for responses is 4th June 2007. The consultation document is available online from the following page:
http://www.defra.gov.uk/corporate/consult/climatechange.htmPrevious UK Government consultations on REACH proposals in 2004 involved over 400 organisations, ranging from manufacturing and distribution to environmental, animal welfare and consumer groups. Several regulatory impact assessments have been published in the UK, and an overview of impact assessments of several countries has indicated that the direct costs expressed as a turnover of the chemical industry are about 0.2%.
On 10th October 2006, it was announced that the HSE had been asked to take on the role of UK Competent Authority for REACH.
HSE Warning over Work at Height
In March 2007, the HSE issued another warning to employers to ensure that proper precautions are in place when working at height. It followed a prosecution in Loughborough in January 2007 in which a Leicestershire builder pleaded guilty to contravening Section 3(2) of the Health and Safety at Work, etc. Act 1974, “.. it shall be the duty of every self-employed person to conduct his undertaking in such a way as to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, that he and other persons (not being his employees) who may be affected thereby are not thereby exposed to risks to their health or safety”. The accused was fined £50,000 with costs of £43,881.
The case arose from the death of a bricklayer in April 2003 (before the Work at Height Regulations 2005 came into force) who was working on a house extension from a tower scaffold which fell over because it had not been properly set up and maintained. A proper risk assessment had not been carried out.
The hierarchy for managing the risks from work at height is to take steps to avoid, prevent or reduce risks; choose the right work equipment and select appropriate measures to prevent falls, such as guardrails and working platforms, before other measures which only mitigate the distance and consequences of a fall, such as fall arrest equipment, nets or airbags.
Employer Fined for Death of Tyre Fitter
A teenage trainee tyre fitter died from extensive internal injuries in May 2005 when a JCB digger tyre that he was inflating with an airline exploded. The tyre had been repaired after a puncture and should have been reinflated in a metal safety cage. However, it was one of a stack of tyres due for reinflation and the employee attempted to inflate it without using any safety device.
On 14th March 2007 in Hamilton Sheriff Court his employer, the managing director of Auchinlea Tyres of Cleland, Lanarkshire, admitted to charges that his negligence led to the death of the teenager, in that he allowed his employee to use an airline that had no pressure gauge, nor a control trigger to inflate tyres. He had also failed to provide a safety cage for the inflation of large tyres.
An HSE investigation found that the JCB tyre involved had been inflated to a pressure reading of between 125 lb to 150 lb per square inch, almost four times the normal pressure for such a tyre at 36 PSI.
Auchinlea Tyres was fined £100,000 and the managing director was fined £24,000.
HSE Issues Two Crown Censures to the Ministry of Defence
While the provisions of the Health and Safety at Work, etc. Act 1974 (HSWA) apply to Crown bodies, including departments and agencies, Crown immunity means that criminal proceedings cannot be taken against the Crown, and such bodies are excluded from the provisions for statutory enforcement, including prosecution and penalties. Administrative procedures known as Crown Censures are used in circumstances where it is the opinion of the HSE that, but for Crown immunity, there would have been sufficient evidence after a workplace incident brought to its attention to provide a realistic prospect of conviction in the courts.
On 16th March 2007, the HSE announced that it had issued two Crown Censures under Section 2(1) of HSWA to the Ministry of Defence (MoD), both arising from fatalities involving the use of workplace transport. MoD representatives were summoned to the HSE London headquarters to answer the censures.
The first fatality occurred in May 2003, when a corporal died as a result of injuries sustained when he was crushed between two armoured personnel carriers being unloaded from a low loader at Teesport, Middlesbrough, Cleveland.
The second incident took place in May 2004, when a lance-bombardier was crushed to death between a Multiple Launch Rocket System vehicle and a large lift truck at Albemarle Barracks, Northumberland.
Both soldiers were on duty at the time of the incidents and the activities were subject to the full application of HSWA as they took place in Great Britain.
HSE investigation of the incidents found significant systemic shortcomings in the corporate arrangements for assessing transport risks in the MoD. Personnel were required to work closely alongside powerful and heavy vehicles. The risk of personal injury was therefore potentially high, but the MoD had failed to properly assess, manage and control the operational risks arising from the use of such workplace transport.
Cabinet Office Personnel Information Note 45 (PIN 45) deals with the enforcement procedures for Crown bodies, including Crown Censures, and can be found on the HSE website at:
http://www.hse.gov.uk/foi/internalops/sectors/public/7_01_34.pdfHSE information on workplace transport safety can be found at:
http://www.hse.gov.uk/workplacetransport/index.htmFine for Unlicensed Asbestos Removal
In the autumn of 2006, North East Environmental Ltd of North Tyneside was engaged as a contractor in the renovation of the Pipeline Centre at Harvey Combe, Killingworth, on Tyneside. Work on the former industrial building involved the removal of asbestos, for which a licence was required, but the company undertook the work without it.
On 19th March 2007, the company pleaded guilty at North Shields Magistrates’ Court to contravening Regulation 3(1) of the Asbestos (Licensing) Regulations 1983 (as amended) in that they undertook work of a type which required a licence when they did not hold a licence for such work. The company was fined £4,600 under the Health and Safety at Work, etc. Act 1974 (HSWA). A director of the company was also fined £4,600 under Section 37(1) of HSWA after he admitted that it was with his consent or connivance as a director that the corporate body committed the offence, and so he too was guilty of that offence. Costs of £4,917.20 were awarded to the HSE, with payment to be divided equally between the company and the director.
The HSE commented that the Asbestos Licensing regime is not a bureaucratic exercise but an important means of controlling work activities with asbestos, which is one of the main causes of occupational disease. This was a case of management failure to ensure that the required licence was held and serves as a reminder that companies risk prosecution if they do not comply.
Injured Rig Worker Rescued by Helicopter
On 19th March 2007, a seriously injured rig worker was airlifted to hospital in Southampton by a UK Coastguard Rescue Helicopter in difficult weather conditions off Portland in Dorset. He was a crew member onboard the GSF Rig 140 on tow to Las Palmas, located at the time around 20 miles offshore from Portland. The man had fallen 20 feet in a Force 10 gale and sustained serious head injuries.
Portland Coastguard were able to land a helicopter on the rig's landing platform 112 feet above sea level in pitching seas and high winds. A deck landing was necessary because the derrick on the rig would have made winching a casualty too dangerous.
Controlling Carbon Dioxide by Creative Accounting
The lack of agreed accountancy standards for stating annual carbon dioxide emissions means that companies can effectively change their procedures for measuring CO2 emissions to suit themselves, making a nonsense of filed figures.
Up to the year 2005, the oil multinational BP stated CO2 emissions of 1.4 billion tonnes in documents filed with the Carbon Disclosure Project, which compiles emissions data on behalf of institutional investors (see http://www.cdproject.net/).
For the year 2006 the company revised downward its CO2 output to 570 million tonnes. This represents a decrease of 830 million tonnes, which is more than the total UK output of CO2 emissions of around 600 million tonnes.
In its new figures, BP has excluded the oil, gas and petrochemicals it buys on the global market, and accounts only for hydrocarbons extracted by the company. The company is entitled to do this, but such figures do not inspire confidence that appropriate action is being taken to limit damage to the global climate.
Sentencing Hearing over the Paddington Train Crash
At the end of March 2007, Network Rail, formerly Railtrack, was the accused at a five-day sentencing hearing held at Blackfriars Crown Court over the Paddington train crash of 1999, in which 31 people were killed and 400 injured. The train operator, Thames Trains, was fined £2 million for the crash in April 2004. Network Rail had admitted to a single offence under Section 3 of the Health and Safety at Work, etc. Act 1974 in October 2006 (in a case brought by the Crown Prosecution Service) and was now fined £4 million, with £225,000 in costs. The court had the power to impose an unlimited fine, which in this case is entirely symbolic as Network Rail is a Government organisation. The fine imposed will be paid from public funds, and then returned to the Government.
The court was told of multiple failures across all levels of staff at Railtrack, which started with the culture at the top of the body responsible for track maintenance and affected staff at all levels of the organisation.
The crash happened on 5th October 1999, when a Thames Train went through a red light at Ladbroke Grove, shortly after leaving Paddington. It collided with a Great Western express, causing the first-class carriage at the front to burst into flames as diesel vapour was released through the wrecked carriages.
Organisational failures to act over a number of years had resulted in train drivers passing through one signal at red on seven separate occasions, that signal being the last protection against a high-speed, head-on collision. The judge described them as systemic and unacceptable safety failures which had led to the Paddington train crash.
After the Hatfield train crash, Balfour Beatty was fined £10 million, later reduced to £7.5 million, and Network Rail was fined £3.5 million.
Updated Fatal Injury Statistics
Summary data on the number of fatal injuries notified to all enforcing authorities, including the Office of Rail Regulation, from 1st April 2005 to 30th September 2006 were published online on 26th March 2007 by the HSE at:
http://www.hse.gov.uk/statistics/fatal6m.htmBetween April 2006 and September 2006 there were 318 reported fatalities, 141 of them classed as members of the public reported to the Office of Rail Regulation (the figure includes 132 suicides and fatal injuries to trespassers on the railways). Of those classed as being at work, 97 of the dead were described as employee workers, and 27 were self-employed.
British Waterways Fined for Double Fatality
In a case heard before Swindon Crown Court in March 2007, British Waterways was fined £100,000, with £32,386 in costs, after admitting breaches of health and safety law over a double fatality in December 2004. The incident involved a father and son, who were drowned when the tractor they were using to trim towpath hedges toppled into the Kennet and Avon canal at Pewsey Wharf as the towpath gave way. Their employer had failed to undertake a proper risk assessment and a crucial safety bulletin had not been circulated to staff.
The senior employee had performed contract work cutting hedges along the canal banks for four years. Although he had attended a safety seminar in 2002, he had not been informed about a safety update introduced after a tractor fell into a canal in Manchester in 2000, due to being operated too close to the edge. The safety update warned that machinery should not be operated within 1.3 metres of a canal edge.
British Waterways had also failed to undertake a survey of the full length of the towpath to find out where it was not wide enough to use heavy machinery under the terms of their own guidance. The tractors belonged to the company, who were therefore aware of their dimensions and weights, but they did not inspect towpath width.
On the day of the accident, both men were in the cab of a 2.5 tonne tractor, which was too large for certain parts of their worksite. The company pointed out that it was not correct procedure for both men to be in the tractor cab.
The court found that the incident would not have happened had the organisation discharged its responsibilities correctly.
Carbon Emissions by UK Generators Soar
A report commissioned by the environmental group WWF from consultants IPA Energy+Water reveals that carbon dioxide emissions from British power stations rose by nearly 30% between 1999 and 2006. In 2006 alone, UK power sector emissions rose by 6% or 178 million tonnes compared to 2005. Since 2002, gas prices have risen by 66% and coal by 33%, leading the generating companies to switch to using more pollution-generating higher carbon fuel.
This is in contrast to the early 1990s, when the availability of North Sea gas reserves prompted the closure of coal-fired power stations and their replacement by cleaner gas-fired plant. In consequence, carbon emissions fell and the UK was able to adopt a relatively strict Kyoto Protocol target. That situation has now been reversed, with emissions rising to the equivalent of their level in 1992.
There are mechanisms designed to reduce emissions, such as the UK Renewables Obligation and the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme, both of which have been subject to exploitation, in the case of the EU scheme by the issue of too many pollution permits; but the policy framework is insufficient to counteract the financial attraction of coal.
In order to meet its global climate change commitments, the UK Government claims that it aims to stem the emissions increase through measures to introduce more low-carbon energy. The Department for Trade and Industry states that renewable energy generation in the UK has been growing at a rapid rate over recent years, from 1.5% in 2001 to almost 5% today.
The UKGovernment admitted last year that it would fail to meet its longstanding commitment to reduce CO2 emissions by 20% from 1990 levels by 2010. Their longer-term targets of CO2 emissions reductions of 30% by 2020 and 60% by 2050, announced in the Climate Change Bill earlier in March 2007, are unlikely to be achieved without a curb in the growth of coal burning for electricity generation, as the power sector accounts for almost a third of UK emissions.
Control of Workplace Stress a Management Responsibility
Joint research by the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) and the HSE has found that the behaviour of a line manager is a major influence on the stress levels of employees, affecting in turn the wellbeing of employees and organisational performance.
The incidence of high stress levels at work was around 20% of those questioned, and 44% said that they feel under excessive pressure once or twice a week, or more. The hidden cost to employers is estimated at £9.6 billion per year, arising from long-term absence, damage to employee morale and productivity, and high staff turnover. There is also the risk of litigation and compensation payouts.
The solution is for employers to train line managers to take a hands-on approach to improving the wellbeing of the workforce, in order to help alleviate stress and reduce absenteeism.
The CIPD, in association with the HSE, has published new guidance to help employers tackle the issue of stress at work. It is based on 19 key management behaviours which play a role in preventing, identifying and tackling stress effectively. The behaviours underlie a framework which enables line managers to assess the skills required to reduce and prevent stress at work. The report can be downloaded from: http://www.hse.gov.uk/research/rrpdf/rr553.pdf
Guidance for line managers is available at: http://www.hse.gov.uk/stress/linemanagers.pdf
The Smoke-Free (Signs) Regulations 2007
These Regulations were made under Chapter 1, Part 1, of the Health Act 2006 and come into force on 1st July 2007 in England only. The Health Act 2006 makes smoking in most enclosed public places and workplaces unlawful from the same date.
Their essential feature (Regulation 2) is that a notice stating "No smoking. It is against the law to smoke in these premises", of at least A5 in size and displaying a statutory no-smoking symbol of at least 70 mm in diameter, must be displayed in a prominent position in the entrance to all smoke-free premises.
Regulation 3 contains requirements for no-smoking signs in vehicles. Any person with management responsibilities for a smoke-free vehicle must display a no-smoking sign in each compartment of his vehicle (i.e. places where people sit or stand).
Construction Companies Fined for Poor Site Management
In late March 2007, Bau GmbH of Angelburg in Germany and Re-Construction UK Ltd of Liverpool were prosecuted by the HSE at Nottingham Crown Court for failing to manage the safety of a construction site for a new Lidl supermarket in Nottingham.
No serious accidents or incidents had taken place, but the HSE had served three prohibition notices on the two contractors following nine complaints from members of the public. The hazardous activities recorded included dangerous working at height, failure to segregate vehicles and pedestrians, unsafe excavation work, failure to wear correct personal protective equipment, failure to control movement of loads around the site, and fire safety breaches.
Bau GmbH was fined £100,000, with costs of £6,188, for contravening Sections 2(1) and 3(1) of the Health and Safety at Work, etc. Act 1974.
Re-Construction UK Ltd was fined £50,000, with costs of £6,188, for contravening Section 3(1) of the Health and Safety at Work, etc. Act 1974.
Hospital Fined over Legionnaires' Disease Death
A hospital patient who had been treated successfully for leukaemia took a shower following his fourth and final chemotherapy session, but as a result he was exposed to Legionnaires' disease from bacteria that had been breeding in the shower head and both the hot and cold water tanks. He contracted the disease and died a month later.
On 29th March 2007, the Royal United Hospital in Bath was fined £80,000, with £24,000 in court costs, in a hearing at Bristol Crown Court. The hospital admitted liability after an HSE investigation exposed a series of failings in the maintenance of the water system. The management had carried out inadequate safety checks on the water system, pleading that they did not have the necessary financial resources.
The family of the deceased had already received a six-figure settlement from the hospital trust.
Oil Tank Explosion in Kent
On 31st March 2007, an explosion took place affecting a water tank and two tanks containing used engine oil at the premises of Eco-Oil Ltd on the Kingsnorth Industrial Estate, located on the Hoo Peninsula in Kent. Emergency services were called to deal with 200,000 litres of burning heavy oil in one tank. It took more than 100 fire-fighters around 10 hours to control the fire with foam within a 200-metre exclusion zone. One man suffered minor burns and a nearby watercourse was contaminated over a 300-metre stretch.
The Health and Safety Executive announced that it would investigate the cause, and the Environment Agency would monitor the site to prevent contamination from reaching the Medway Estuary.
The Work and Families Act 2006
New employment rights are introduced by the Work and Families Act 2006, which came into force on 6th April 2007. Among other provisions, maternity leave is to be extended to 12 months, and there is an extension of the right to request flexible working, currently restricted to parents of children under six years, to carers of adults.
The additional paternity rights are scheduled to be introduced before the end of this parliament.
Biocidal Products Legislation
The HSE has updated its Blue Book register of approved biocides and pesticide products, the documents being accessible individually from:
http://www.hse.gov.uk/pesticides/bluebook/partb.htmHSE Report on the Barrow Legionella Outbreak
In early April 2007, the HSE published a report on the outbreak of Legionnaires' disease in Barrow, Cumbria, in 2002, in which seven people died and another 180 were infected. The outbreak was traced to a faulty air-conditioning system at the Forum 28 arts centre, which was run by Barrow Borough Council. The system was not properly cleaned and the temperature inside was not controlled. Litigation has been on-going since the incident. The report followed a lengthy investigation and a series of public meetings held in Barrow last December.
Following a prosecution, Barrow Borough Council was cleared of corporate manslaughter, but fined £125,000 for breaching health and safety legislation. An independent inquiry into the outbreak was carried out last year, and found that safety documents had been thrown away. It also found that communication at the Borough Council was non-existent and the chain of command and duty of care failed completely.
The HSE stated that poor communication within Barrow Borough Council was to blame for the outbreak. Guidelines on how to avoid Legionella were readily available then, and the guidance has not changed since. In this case, the relevant documents were not used and they were not disseminated around the Borough Council. The Borough Council had failed to carry out a risk assessment and to properly manage their contractors to ensure the system was adequately maintained. Communication between staff responsible for the air-conditioning system at the Borough Council was poor and they failed to act when concerns were raised.
An inquest into the deaths of the victims is to take place in June 2007.
New ConDoc on Societal Risk
The HSE has published a new consultative document, CD212 Proposals for revised policies to address societal risk around onshore non-nuclear major hazard installations. It deals with the issue of societal risk around onshore non-nuclear major hazard installations and development of policy in this area.
Prompted among others by the Buncefield incident (ConDoc CD211 was on proposals for revised policies for HSE advice on development and control around large-scale petrol storage depots), the document asks what issues should be taken into consideration when decisions are made on what might be regarded as unacceptable levels of societal risk when looking at major hazards, and how information on societal risk might be factored into the advice that the HSE gives to planning authorities on proposals for new developments in areas around sites, such that decisions are made which appropriately balance risks to people, costs to industry and benefits of development.
Updated Guidance on the Electricity at Work Regulations
On 3rd April 2007, the HSE announced publication of the second edition of the Memorandum of Guidance on the Electricity at Work Regulations 1989, ISBN 9780717662289. This new edition updates references to relevant regulations, standards and publications, and replaces references to the Institution of Electrical Engineers' IEE Regulations with BS 7671.
The book is described as relevant to all work activities and premises except mines and quarries, certain offshore installations and certain ships. The guidance is intended to assist duty holders in meeting the requirements of the Regulations. It will be of interest and practical help primarily to engineers (including those involved in the design, construction, operation or maintenance of electrical systems and equipment), technicians and their managers.
HSE Updates RIDDOR Website
The HSE has improved and updated the pages on its website dedicated to reporting workplace accidents, now providing online links to reporting forms. The URL is:
http://www.hse.gov.uk/riddor/index.htm?Amendment to COMAH Guidance
The HSE has published a correction to Guidance Document L111, A Guide to the Control of Major Accident Hazards Regulations 1999 (as amended). An error occurs on page 88 of L111 under the heading 'highly flammable liquids' at Schedule 1, Part 3, paragraph 3(b)(ii), where there is a typing error and the words 'substances and preparations' were erroneously changed to 'gases'. Paragraph 3(b)(ii) was unaffected by the amendments to the Regulations.
The full correct sentence at 3(b)(ii) in L111 (page 88) should read:
“(ii) substances and preparations which have a flash point lower than 21°C and which are not extremely flammable (risk phrase R11, second indent); and…”
Please e-mail us with news and views about health and safety which you think would be of interest and would like to share with other newsletter subscribers.
Click here to be removed from our mailing list.