HSfB Wins Fife Regional Council Shield - Press Release

HSfB Wins Fife Regional Council Shield - Press Release

HSfB Wins Fife Regional Council Shield

John Johnston, creator of the website Health and Safety for Beginners (HSfB) - www.healthandsafetytips.co.uk, has had his commitment and passion for health and safety recognised after being awarded the Fife Regional Council Shield for his safety innovation. The award was presented by Dr Karen McDonnel from RoSPA at a ceremony held at the Dunfermline Building Society, during the annual general meeting of the Fife Chamber of Safety (now known as Safety Group - Fife) on Monday 14 May. The trophy was awarded to John for his web site initiative which provides many free tools for health and safety professionals and learning materials for students across the UK and internationally through downloads, discussion forums and a unique prize draw.

Speaking of the award, John said: “This is the second award in as many months and I am absolutely delighted to have won the Fife Shield. Safety Group - Fife is a big part of my life now and I am extremely proud to have been recognised by the group for this award."

Other awards at the AGM went to:

• UDV Shield - Exxon Mobil
• Raithian Quaich - Dryburgh Associates
• Nairn Trophy - Fife Council Intervention Team
• A special award was made to Sam Dimeck in recognition of his long service and recognition to the Chamber over the last 20 years.

John added: “after suffering a serious back injury in 2000 and knowing how difficult it was to fund my own NEBOSH general certificate training, I wanted to find a way in which I could help others develop a career in health and safety. Thanks to the website, and the generosity of the training providers and professionals who donated the prizes, this has been achieved.”

The training materials were given away as part of a free prize draw which featured on John’s website Health and Safety for Beginners (HSfB) - www.healthandsafetytips.co.uk The winners were announced at the Leicester-based headquarters of the National Examination Board in Occupational Safety and Health; NEBOSH in February 2007.

View our press release on the prize draw here - Health and Safety for Beginners Prize Draw Results

View our press release on John's first award here - HSfB Wins Lord Cullen Trophy for Safety Innovation

Donations for the prize draw came from health and safety training providers after they found out about an initiative John launched in November 2006, which saw him personally fund a prize (using money gained from selling advertising space on his website www.healthandsafetytips.co.uk) for a site user to undertake a NVQ level 4.

Hugely impressed with John’s commitment and dedication to improving health and safety in the workplace, training providers soon stepped forward and offered a variety of different prizes to add to the draw including a range of NEBOSH e-learning training courses, residential training courses, guided tours of high performing organisations as well as reference materials so that more people could benefit.

The prizes and donating organisations were:

• NEBOSH National General Certificate – e-learning - RRC Training
• NEBOSH Certificate in Fire Safety and Risk Management - e-Learning - RRC Training
• NVQ Level 4 OR NVQ Level 5 - She Knows Health & Safety
• IOSH Working Safely for up to ten people in Manchester - Smart Training Solutions
• Radiation Protection Supervisor (RPS) Training Course (2-day residential) - Ionactive Consulting
• Guided Tour of a large multi-national organisation - Express Park
• The Handbook of Health and Safety Practice by Jeremy Stranks - HSfB
• The Principles of Health and Safety at Work by Allan St John Holt - Safetyphoto

In total, John managed to raise over £7250 worth of training and learning resources, and over 350 training hours (not including the NVQ) which had the potential for 17 lucky health and safety professionals to take their career to the next level.

HSfB Wins Lord Cullen Trophy for Safety Innovation - Press Release

HSfB Wins Lord Cullen Trophy for Safety Innovation - Press Release

HSfB Wins Lord Cullen Trophy for Safety Innovation

John Johnston, Health and Safety Advisor at FMC Technologies, Dunfermline and a member of the Fife Chamber of Safety has had his commitment and passion for Health and Safety recognised after being awarded the Lord Cullen Trophy for Safety Performance. The award was presented by Lord Cullen, president of the Scottish Chamber of Safety (S.C.O.S), at a ceremony held in Dunblane, by the S.C.O.S on Wednesday 4th April. The trophy was awarded to John for an initiative which will see health and safety professionals from across the UK benefit from free health and safety training and learning materials.

Speaking of the award, John said: “I am absolutely delighted to have won the Lord Cullen trophy for safety innovation. It was something that had never crossed my mind when I first started my website – www.healthandsafetytips.co.uk. I am also very proud to bring the trophy back to the Fife Chamber of Safety for another year.

“After suffering a serious back injury in 2000 and knowing how difficult it was to fund my own NEBOSH general certificate training, I wanted to find a way in which I could help others develop a career in health and safety. Thanks to the website, and the generosity of the training providers and professionals who donated the prizes, this has been achieved.”

Speaking of John’s work, David Currie, Managing Director of FMC Technologies said: “John is absolutely deserving of this award and I, on behalf of FMC congratulate him. Health and Safety is at the core of everything we do and we fully appreciate John’s expertise and contribution in this area. His personal commitment is an example to us all.”

The training materials were given away as part of a free prize draw which featured on John’s website Health and Safety for Beginners - www.healthandsafetytips.co.uk The winners were announced at the Leicester-based headquarters of the National Examination Board in Occupational Safety and Health; NEBOSH in February 2007.

View our press release on the prize draw here - Health and Safety for Beginners Prize Draw Results

Donations for the prize draw came from health and safety training providers after they found out about an initiative John launched in November 2006, which saw him personally fund a prize (using money gained from selling advertising space on his website www.healthandsafetytips.co.uk) for a site user to undertake a NVQ level 4.

Hugely impressed with John’s commitment and dedication to improving health and safety in the workplace, training providers soon stepped forward and offered a variety of different prizes to add to the draw including a range of NEBOSH e-learning training courses, residential training courses, guided tours of high performing organisations as well as reference materials so that more people could benefit.

The prizes and donating organisations were:

• NEBOSH National General Certificate – e-learning - RRC Training
• NEBOSH Certificate in Fire Safety and Risk Management - e-Learning - RRC Training
• NVQ Level 4 OR NVQ Level 5 - She Knows Health & Safety
• IOSH Working Safely for up to ten people in Manchester - Smart Training Solutions
• Radiation Protection Supervisor (RPS) Training Course (2-day residential) - Ionactive Consulting
• Guided Tour of a large multi-national organisation - Express Park
• The Handbook of Health and Safety Practice by Jeremy Stranks - HSfB
• The Principles of Health and Safety at Work by Allan St John Holt - Safetyphoto

In total, John managed to raise over £7250 worth of training and learning resources, and over 350 training hours (not including the NVQ) which had the potential for 17 lucky health and safety professionals to take their career to the next level.

Asked about what he is going to do next, John said: “More of the same next year, if my nerves can stand it”.

Pictured above – John Johnston holding
the Lord Cullen Trophy at FMC Technologies, Dunfermline

The Regulatory Reform Order 2005

The Regulatory Reform Order 2005

The Regulatory Reform Order 2005

Created October 2006, published 2 October 2006

The Regulatory Reform Order 2005

Now that fire legislation has changed and the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 is now in force, the responsible person for a building (all non domestic) will have to conduct a fire risk assessment.

All existing fire legislation has now been repealed or revoked, which includes the Fire Precautions Act 1971, the amended 1997 Fire Precautions (Workplace) Regulations plus 100 other pieces of fire related legislation. Fire certificates are no longer valid.

The Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 is a fire risk assessment based approach where the responsible person(s) for the premises or area where they have control must decide how to address the risks identified, while meeting certain requirements.

By adopting a fire risk assessment, the responsible person(s) will need to look at how to prevent fire from occurring in the first place, by removing or reducing hazards and risks (ignition sources) and then at the precautions to ensure that people are adequately protected if a fire were still to occur. Therefore the main emphases of the changes are to move towards fire prevention.

The fire risk assessment must also take into consideration the effect a fire may have on anyone in or around your premises plus neighbouring property. The building fire risk assessment will also need to be kept under regular review (it is a living document).

The Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 will apply to all non-domestic properties, including voluntary organisations and will be subject to monitoring and, where appropriate, enforcement by the Local Authority Fire Service (LAFS).

Summary of the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005

• All existing fire legislation has now been repealed or revoked, which includes the Fire Precautions Act 1971, the amended 1997 Fire Precautions (Workplace) Regulations plus 100 other pieces of fire related legislation.
• Fire certificates have been abolished and are no longer issued or in force.
• Responsible person(s) will be responsible for fire safety. They must conduct a fire risk assessment regardless of the size of the risk.
• The identified responsible person(s) would take full corporate liability.
• Extended scope of consideration now to include property safety, fire fighter safety and the environment around the site. The responsible person(s) would have a duty to protect all risks.
• Unlike the amended 1997 Fire Precautions (Workplace) Regulations, the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 places emphasis on business continuity and containing and preventing the spread of small fires.
• Protection is explicitly extended to all occupants, which would include employees, visitors, contractors and passers-by who would all have to be considered in the fire risk assessment.

Who is the responsible person(s)?

• Employer with control of a workplace

Failing that or in addition;

• Person with overall management of a building,
• Occupier of premises,
• Owner of premises (i.e. empty buildings),
• Landlords (multi occupied buildings).

Question?

What is the difference between a fire risk assessment and a health & safety risk assessment?

Answer!

Absolutely nothing.

Why?

Because the aim of both is to:

• Identify hazards,
• Reduce the risk of those hazards identified,
• To decide what physical precautions and management arrangements are necessary to ensure the safety of people.

So with any fire risk assessment you will always:

• Identify the hazard,
• Identify who is at risk,
• Evaluate, remove, reduce and protect from risk,
• Record, plan, inform, instruct and train,
• Review.

It is important, if you carry out your fire risk assessment yourself, that you do it in a practical and systematic way. It must take the whole area of your responsibility into account, including outdoor locations and any rooms and areas that are rarely used.

If your responsible area in a building is shared with others, you and all the other occupiers and any other person(s) who have control of any other part of the premises will need to discuss yours and theirs fire risk assessment.

In a shared building it is imperative and a requirement that all responsible persons;

Communicate, Co-operate and Co-ordinate their findings with their fire risk assessments.

When you conduct your fire risk assessment you must:

• Identify who is at risk,
• Eliminate or reduce potential ignition sources,
• Ensure there are suitable means of detecting & raising the alarm in the event of fire,
• Ensure there are adequate emergency escape routes & exits,
• Ensure there are appropriate type & sufficient quantities of fire fighting equipment,
• Ensure there are the correct type & sufficient quantities of fire signs & notices,
• Ensure there are provisions for the correct maintenance of installed fire equipment,
• Ensure that there are suitable provisions for the protection of Fire Service personnel,
• Ensure that building occupants receive the appropriate instruction / training in, e.g. actions to be taken in the event of fire and fire evacuation drills,

Please note, that if your organisation employs five or more people or the premise are licensed or an alterations notice is in force, you must record any significant findings and the actions you have taken.

In addition to the above, the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order stipulates that:

¹You must appoint one or more competent persons, depending on the size and use of your premises, to carry out any of the preventive and protective measures required (you can nominate yourself for this purpose). A competent person is someone with enough training and experience or knowledge and other qualities to be able to implement these measures properly.

You must provide your employees with clear and relevant information on the risks to them identified by the fire risk assessment, about the measure you have taken to prevent fires, and how these measures will protect them if a fire breaks out.

You must consult your employees (or their elected representatives) about nominating people to carry out particular roles in connection with fire safety and about proposals for improving the fire precautions.

You must, before you employ a child, provide a parent with clear and relevant information on the risks to that child identified by the risk assessment, the measures you have put in place to prevent/protect them from fire and inform any other responsible person of any risks to that child arising from their undertaking.

You must inform non-employees, such as temporary or contract workers, of the relevant risks to them, and provide them with information about who the nominated competent persons are, and about the fire safety procedures for the premises.

You must co-operate and co-ordinate with other responsible persons who also have premises in the building, inform them of any significant risks you find and how you will seek to reduce/control those risks which might affect the safety of their employees.

You must provide the employer of any person from an outside organisation who is working in your premises (e.g. an agency providing temporary staff) with clear and relevant information on the risks to those employees and the preventive and protective measures taken. You must also provide those employees with appropriate instructions and relevant information about the risks to them.

If you are not the employer but have any control of premises which contain more than one workplace, you are also responsible for ensuring that the requirements of the Order are complied with in those parts over which you have control.

You must consider the presence of any dangerous substances and the risk this presents to relevant persons from fire.

You must establish a suitable means of contacting the emergency services and provide them with any relevant information about dangerous substances.

You must provide appropriate information, instruction and training to your employees, during their normal working hours, about the fire precautions in your workplace, when they start working for you, and from time to time throughout the period they work for you.

You must ensure that the premises and any equipment provided in connection with firefighting, fire detection and warning, or emergency routes and exits are covered by a suitable system of maintenance and are maintained by a competent person in an efficient state, in efficient working order and in good repair.

Your employees must co-operate with you to ensure the workplace is safe from fire and its effects, and must not do anything that will place themselves or other people at risk.”

Note. If you were already complying with the revoked amended 1997 Fire Precautions (Workplace) Regulation and the 1971 Fire Precautions Act (fire certificate if issued), you will only have to make adjustments to your existing fire risks assessments. If, however, you have not conducted a fire risk assessment of your area of responsibility you must do so now.

The Government have produced 11 guides to assist the responsible person(s) with their responsibilities, to view these guides visit www.communities.gov.uk. These guides have been written to assist you to carry out a fire risk assessment within your area of responsibility. If you read the guides and decide that you are unable to apply the guidance, then you should seek expert advice from a competent person. More complex premises will probably need to be assessed by a person who has comprehensive training or experience in fire risk assessment.

If required, Fire Safety Service can assist you in the implementation and management of the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005. For further details contact us at www.firesafetyadvisor.co.uk/ or telephone 01865 890085.

¹ Extract from Government guidance document’s to the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005

Asbestos – for the Health and Safety Beginner.

Asbestos – for the Health and Safety Beginner.

Asbestos is one of those words H & S professionals don’t like to hear. To most people it means Lung Cancer, Compensation or Expensive removal work.
In the maze of H & S regulations, this one often gets forgotten….or worse…some people really believe their building has NO Asbestos, so why bother…even though their building was built pre 1999 (when Asbestos use in building materials was finally banned ). What needs to be realised is that asbestos was incorporated into over 3000 products, including floor tiles, artex, pipe insulation, cement, cavity wall insulation, …..heck they even put it into toilet seats….

The fact is …you have a duty in LAW under the ‘Control of Asbestos at Work Regulations 2002 (CAWR 2002) Regulaton 4 The Duty to Manage’, to produce an Asbestos Management Plan and Asbestos Register detailing the locations of any Asbestos Containing Materials (ACM’s) and to continue to manage any positive areas.

Why?

The object of the register is to provide information relating to the building and the whereabouts of ACM’s. This allows tradesmen to plan and carry out any remedial or improvement works safely. Would you want to be sitting in your office while the maintenance man drills into a wall to put up a shelf ….only for you to hear him say… “hey, I’m sure this wall is Asbestos Board”? or for your boss to say “someone is suing us for exposure to asbestos, where’s the register, I’ll prove it wasn’t” and your answer is “what register?”

So what do you do?

Firstly don’t panic…..if you have had an asbestos register done previously, check it to establish when it was last updated, you may need another survey. Registers should be updated on a yearly basis or earlier if damage is reported, along with the measures taken as a result of this report.

Things change over time, sometimes these changes are not recorded and no one has any idea who did what or when!.

A Competent person will need to do a visual re-inspection to establish that areas found to contain Asbestos are damage free and still in good condition, and will need to document the findings, Its no use going around the building checking if you have no proof you have done it! Or get an Asbestos Surveyor to do the re-inspection, many companies choose this route because Asbestos Surveyors are qualified and insured to do this specific type of work.

If you have not had a register done previously, you need to assess the probability of your building containing Asbestos.

All buildings must have a register, if your building was built after 2000 a letter from the architect detailing that materials were sourced which do not contain Asbestos will suffice, file it and relax.

If your building was built before 2000 you need to survey. For many this is done through a surveying company.

Most importantly you need to sit down and plan how you will survey, what type of survey you need, who needs access to the survey results and how will they will be accessed ( hard copy, electronic database) and also how you will manage the survey results in the future.

Most dutyholders use asbestos surveying companies to produce their asbestos report.

Surveying costs vary with the size of site and the type of survey required and can be expensive, however it doesn’t always pay to go with the cheapest company, whoever you decide to employ, remember the following.

Asbestos survey companies have qualified surveyors. Asbestos qualifications are specific, a surveyor must hold a minimum qualification of BOHS P402, a senior surveyor S301 and a consultant will hold a Certificate of Competence in Asbestos (CCP) this is the highest qualification you can get in the Asbestos industry. Ask to see copies of your surveyor’s qualifications.

Check that the surveying company you use has adequate insurance cover, some surveying companies are not insured for type 3 surveys.

The main thing is communication with the surveyor, tell the surveyor what you want the survey to achieve, and any areas you specifically want surveyed. If the building is to be demolished or undergo major refurbishment your needs will be different to a building that isn’t, a good surveyor will tell you what is and isn’t possible during a survey and what areas you need to take into consideration.

Ask to see a copy report, a survey report is no good if it is written or presented in such a way that you or your tradesmen don’t understand it!

Ask for references…and check them, ask the customer if they were happy with the service…and the after sales service.

Does the company have a database system that allows your results to be accessed on line by authorised personnel? This is a particularly useful management tool for companies who manage more that one site eg housing authorities.

There are 3 different survey types, which one do you need

Type one: Location and assessment survey (presumptive)

Type 1 surveys are designed to locate, as far as reasonably practical, any ACMs and assess the risk and are used when sampling is not a suitable option. All areas of a building are accessed but as materials are only presumed to contain asbestos they rely heavily on the experience and knowledge of surveyor. Samples would have to be taken before maintenance work started to confirm the presence or absence of Asbestos.

Type two: Standard Sampling, identification and assessment survey (sampling survey)

The purpose and procedures of a type 2 survey are as for a type 1 survey but includes the sampling of suspect ACMs to confirm the surveyors’ judgment. The samples are analysed by an accredited laboratory and the resulting report informs exactly which materials in the building are or are not asbestos containing. This is the most commonly utilised survey for asbestos management plans.

Type three: Full access sampling and identification survey (pre-demolition/major refurbishment survey)

Type 3 surveys are used to locate all ACMs, as far as reasonably practicable within a building and its structure and may involve destructive inspection techniques. These surveys are designed to estimate quantity of asbestos rather than condition to allow tendering of asbestos removal prior to demolition or refurbishment.
On some larger sites a mixture of the above survey types can be used if different parts of the site have varying requirements.

How will you manage the survey in the future?

Once the survey is completed you need ongoing management of the data. Put procedures in place for responsibility and timescales to make sure the information is updated and re-inspections are carried out.

Finally……. train all employees on Asbestos Awareness and put in place a contingency plan in case asbestos is found or accidentally damaged.

A good effective asbestos management plan will satisfy the HSE and your insurers.

Remember, the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) take the enforcement of asbestos legislation very seriously – ignorance it not a defence! http://www.hse-databases.co.uk/prosecutions/

The HSE website www.hse.gov.uk/asbestos and www.etonservices.co.uk - Eton Environmental Services Ltd. Eton, Windsor, Berkshire | Asbestos Consultancy Service are a great place to start to get free information on asbestos.

Risk Assessments and Health and Safety

Risk Assessments and Health and Safety

One area that really needs to be enforced in schools is risk assessments. Not just by the caretaker, but by every member of staff. Everyone working in a school has a responsibility to those they work with and teacher to ensure they work in a safe and healthy environment.

TeachersTV has recently made a film about the importance of completing risk assessments and Health and Safety. The film highlights some of the main points that you need to address.

Proper Storage

Schools are busy places. Equipment left out can be a cause of accidents. As part of the risk assessment, you should identify areas where there is a need for correct storage. This can be cupboards for equipment or lockers for pupils. Busy corridors and fire exits are places that equipment should never be stored.

Manual Handling

Many staff will attempt to place items for storage above head height or try to work on noticeboards or display boards above head height. These areas of risk should be identified within the risk assessment. Staff should be given clear instructions and told not to use chairs, tables or even pupils to gain that extra height. Step ladders should be provided. Within the instructions, staff should be aware that when using step ladders, another member of staff should be present to steady the steps and you should not carry items up the steps yourself, but have them passed to you when you are at the correct height.

Employers have a duty to provide you the correct equipment.

Lifting and Carrying

All staff should be aware of the techniques for lifting and carrying. Within the risk assessment, items like Briefcases, books, Over Head Projectors (OHPs) and laptops should be highlighted. It's often these small but bulky items that get overlooked.

Always bend at the knees keeping your back straight. When you finish the lift, straighten your knees, always keeping your back straight.

Keeping corridors safe

All school should have strict rules of conduct in corridors. Pupils should be aware of the dangers of pushing, shoving or running in corridors. Pupils should be aware of the reporting process if they find spillages or loose tiles in corridors. Corridors should be kept clear at all times, this includes pupils. Do not let pupils hang around in corridors (eg breaktimes). Do not place chairs or tables in corridors. Corridors are also the main fire exit within schools. If a panic was to happen during a fire, a chair or table could cause a serious problems.

These are just some of the issues the 15 minute film covers.

To watch the film provided by TeachersTV now, CLICK HERE to be taken to the Caretakers' Website hosting the film. You will need a broadband connection to stream this (35mb) media and Windows Media Player.

Written by thecaretaker of The Caretakers' Website

Changes to the Rule for Training of Drivers of Vehicles carrying Dangerous Goods

Changes to the Rule for Training of Drivers of Vehicles carrying Dangerous Goods

Currently drivers of vehicles with a permissible maximum mass exceeding 3.5 tonnes have to posses an ADR training certificate.

From 1st January 2007 the exemption for drivers of vehicles less than 3.5 tonnes expires. From that date drivers of all vehicles that carry dangerous goods will be required to hold a vocational training certificate (ADR).

General Training Requirements

Since 1999 all persons (not only drivers) such as consignors, carriers, packers and container operators, whose duties concern the carriage of dangerous goods require some form of training. They have to receive training appropriate to their responsibilities and duties. This training is usually an awareness course.

The awareness course must cover the following subjects:

General Awareness Training
Function-specific Training &
Safety Training

Driver Training from 1st Jan 2007

When would a driver require an ADR certificate?

There will be some exemptions that can still be claimed for the driver to have an ADR. These can be found in section 1.1.3.1 – 1.1.3.6.4 of ADR. Some examples are:

1) If the vehicle is being used for private use

2) Carriage of machinery or equipment

3) If package meet the requirement of Limited Quantities

There is an additional exemption where the quantity of dangerous goods carried does not exceed the values set out in table 1.1.3.6. of ADR. To know if this exemption can be claimed, you first need to establish what transport category the goods belong to. This information should be available from the consignor. The second piece of information required would be the quantity of dangerous goods on the vehicle.

If the quantity of dangerous goods carried does not exceed the value indicated for the given transport category the carrier can then claim exemption for the requirement of the driver for having an ADR certificate.

For example:

For Transport Category 0 there are no exemptions

For Transport Category 1. The exemption applies until the quantity carried exceeds 20 (kilograms or litres)

For Transport Category 2. The exemption applies until the quantity transported exceeds 333 (kilograms or litres)

For Transport Category 3. The exemption applies until the quantity transported exceeds 1,000 (kilograms or litres)

Although the driver is exempt from an ADR certificate he would still be required to have awareness training. Where these values (or values for mixed loading in 1.1.3.6.4) are exceeded then the driver would be required to have an ADR.

How the changes came about

August 2002

The Government of Liechtenstein proposed mandatory training for drivers carrying dangerous goods regardless of the permissible maximum weight of their vehicle.

November 2002

Opinions at the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe were divided on the proposal. Some delegates noted that these vehicles were regularly able to carry goods in quantities greater than the exemption limits of 1.1.3.6 and those vehicles were increasingly being used to carry dangerous goods since they were subject neither to the same speed limits as heavy vehicles nor to weekend travel restrictions (for certain countries).

Others considered that in view of the number of drivers concerned, a measure of this nature would have considerable economic consequences and that the cost for carriers should be carefully evaluated with a view to the benefits in terms of safety, which needed to be supported by accident statistics. It was also noted that the drivers of these vehicles were in any case subject to the general company training requirements of Chapter 1.3.

The representative of Liechtenstein was asked to submit a new proposal for the next session, which would take into account the necessary consequential amendments.

May 2003

Liechtenstein resubmits it proposal but this time with support from other countries: Austria, Norway, Poland and most notably Germany

Some delegations said that the proposed obligation concerning the training of drivers of vehicles with a permissible maximum mass not exceeding 3.5 tonnes would involve a very large number of drivers and would therefore have considerable economic repercussions.

Other delegations stressed that training requirements had caused a significant increase in the production cost of the transport of dangerous goods, and that in order to avoid it, the industry was more and more resorting to using vehicles not exceeding 3.5 tonnes, which were increasingly effective in power and speed but fell short of numerous safety requirements.

The representative of Italy proposed that the decision on this proposal should be deferred, so as to give Governments time to collect accident statistics and assess safety advantages in relation to cost. After a vote resulting in equal numbers for and against, the proposal was not accepted.

The Working Party finally decided to adopt the proposal by Liechtenstein to the effect that all drivers of vehicles carrying dangerous goods, irrespective of the permissible maximum mass of the vehicle, subject to the exemptions set out in 1.1.3, must be trained in accordance with 8.2.1. This measure would take effect on 1 January 2007 at the latest (see annex).

So industry has not only had the usual six month introductory period but it has had over 2 years to get ready.

It is unlikely that there will be any extension or exemption as the view is that industry has already had two years to adapt. If they have not adapted by now then they have only themselves to blame.

Although spot checks will not be carried out on January1st 2007, I have been assured that enforcement will be taking place as of the 2nd of January.

Are you ready?

www.ritchiestraining.com

Further information on the exemptions that can be made can be found in the following Microsoft Publisher file:

Exemption Book A4 Size (PDF 296KB)

Hospital Equipment and Supplies

Hospital Equipment and Supplies

Hospital Equipment and Supplies

Clinical Waste Discussion Forum – a new resource

Clinical wastes are notoriously variable in composition. They comprise potentially infectious used swabs and dressings, syringes and needles, blades and other “sharps”, laboratory and pharmaceutical wastes, and many sanitary wastes. Disposal is a complex undertaking, and is inevitably costly. The complexity of regulations governing disposal present can be overwhelming, while the risks to health & safety, hospital hygiene, and to infection control present an often profound challenge.

Public, political and professional concerns about environmental protection, and the rising infection rates and standards of hygiene in hospitals, drive improvement in the management of clinical wastes. Deficiencies undoubtedly exist. Waste segregation in hospitals is often inadequate, in breach of the Hazardous Wastes Regulation 2005, and incurring additional cost in disposal. Bulk waste carts are located in insecure areas accessible to the public. Waste carts obstruct fire exits. Though official guidance is available, this generally lacks the detail necessary to ensure an adequate standard of performance. An impending revision of clinical waste management procedures across the NHS proposes considerable change to the segregation, packaging and processing of wastes, and the introduction of additional colour schemes for the identification of “new” waste streams. These proposals, if accepted, will dramatically increase costs. Waste containers and their holders will require replacement to support new colour coding schemes; additional signage will be essential, as part of a comprehensive retraining process to ensure change is managed effectively. But how might this be managed? What are the wider ramifications for waste contractors and the manufacturers of key equipment and supplies? And what about the often critical space constraints in clinical areas that may have to accommodate additional coded waste containers? Of the greatest concern is the possibility that the NHS proposals, and the Hazardous Waste Regulations 2005, may undermine the CDC Universal Precautions since this will have profound Health & Safety implications and increase the risks to all those handling clinical wastes.

Though considerable expertise exists throughout the disposal chain, there is a tendency for professional groups to work largely in isolation. In the commercial sector, issues of confidentiality and market sensitivity have a negative impact and impede development at the expense of market sector advantage. Customer representation is almost unknown, and waste producers have neither a voice to express their concerns, nor an opportunity to learn from the experience of the commercial sector. As regulatory bodies, the Environment Agency and the Health & Safety Executive, together with the Department of Health and the Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA), sit largely apart from waste producers and waste disposal contractors, having their own agendas that impact on or dictate policy, though not always in conformity with essential waste management practice. Clearly, there is need for more effective information interchange, to share knowledge and opinion, news and views, among sometimes disparate groups, and this has prompted the creation of the Clinical Waste Discussion Forum. Accessible at http://www.ianblenkharn.com, the Forum is free, independent and non-commercial, with a fully open editorial policy. Participation is invited from all those involved in the management of clinical wastes, the designers, manufacturers and suppliers of waste disposal equipment and consumables, and from the legislators and representatives of regulatory bodies. Of equal importance are the patients’ organisations, and those who feel they are affected by clinical waste issues in their community since these individuals have almost no voice at all.

Funded by a generous development grant from Cliniserve Limited, a specialist clinical waste management company operating across the UK (Cliniserve Limited, Chichester PO20 6QH, http://www.cliniserve.co.uk), the Forum seeks to bring together a range of views, concerns, opinions and expertise not available within any one discipline or professional organisation. This should become a key resource for those who share our aims, to ensure the widest possible exchange of information, and bring together people from many different disciplines in order to develop and promote best practice. Though in its infancy, items posted to the Forum include issues of waste security in hospital premises, clinical waste composition and the suitability of different disposal technologies, and the application of new packaging technologies to replace the ubiquitous yellow waste sack. It is, intentionally, a multi-disciplinary forum that seeks to bring together producers, contractors, legislators and others. We invite everyone to take part in discussions, to share information, use the Forum as a sounding board for new ideas, ask a question, or offer answers to assist others. Visit the Forum, bookmark the site, and come back regularly to share thoughts and experiences with others.


Ian Blenkharn is an independent healthcare and environmental microbiologist specialising in clinical wastes management, bio-safety, hospital hygiene and the prevention of healthcare-associated infection. He is moderator of the Clinical Waste Discussion Forum, which is accessible at http://www.ianblenkharn.com

Ian Blenkharn MSc CBiol MIBiol CSci FIBMS GradMCIWM AIIRSM