Bonfire Night - Organising firework displays – Stay safe

Firework displays should be enjoyable and spectacular occasions – but they obviously need some responsible planning. The good news is that there is straightforward guidance to help you.

If you are organising a major public event, you will clearly need a robust and detailed approach to planning as well as professional involvement. If you are holding a local firework display, such as those organised by many sports clubs, schools or parish councils, you still need to plan responsibly, but the same level of detail is not necessary or expected. Below are some tips and guidance to help you.

Before the event:

• Think about who will operate the display. There is no reason why you should not light a display yourselves provided it only contains fireworks in categories 1, 2 and 3. but remember, category 4 fireworks may only be used by professional firework display operators. In untrained hands they can be lethal.
• Consider whether the site is suitable and large enough for your display, including a bonfire if you are having one. Is there space for the fireworks to land well away from spectators? Remember to check in daylight for overhead power lines and other obstructions. What is the direction of the prevailing wind? What would happen if it changed?
• Think about what you would do if things go wrong. Make sure there is someone who will be responsible for calling the emergency services
• Make sure you obtain the fireworks from a reputable supplier.
• If the display is to be provided by a professional firework display operator make sure that you are clear on who does what especially in the event of an emergency
• Ensure you have a suitable place to store the fireworks. Your firework supplier or local authority should be able to advise
• If you plan on selling alcohol the bar should be well away from the display site

On the day of the event:

• Recheck the site, weather conditions and wind direction
• Don't let anyone into the zone where the fireworks will fall – or let anyone other than the display operator or firing team into the firing zone or the safety zone around it
• Discourage spectators from bringing drink onto the site
• Don't let spectators bring their own fireworks onto the site
• If you will also have a bonfire at the display then you should:
• Check the structure is sound and does not have small children or animals inside it before lighting it
• Not use petrol or paraffin to light the fire
• Have only one person responsible for lighting the fire. That person, and any helpers, should wear suitable clothing e.g. a substantial outer garment made of wool or other low-flammable material.
• Make sure that the person lighting the fire and any helpers know what to do in the event of a burn injury or clothing catching fire
• Never attempt to relight fireworks. Keep well clear of fireworks that have failed to go off

The morning after:

• Carefully check and clear the site. Dispose of fireworks safely.

Finally enjoy the event.

Barnet building business turns ‘blind eye’

A Barnet building firm has been fined after it ‘turned a blind eye’ to potential asbestos hazards being faced by its workers, who were converting an old pub in Victoria Road into flats.
Westminster Magistrates were told (8 Oct) that concerns about health and safety on the site were raised by local people, who were also worried about the risks to passers-by.
An Inspector from the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) visited on 4 March 2013 to check conditions, and enforcement action regarding unsafe work at height and inadequate fire precautions was taken against MP Builders Ltd that day. The firm was also asked to provide information about how they were managing the asbestos risks on site, but HSE heard nothing from them.
As a result, HSE visited again on 22 March and served an improvement notice on the company, giving them four weeks to provide the workers with the training they needed to enable them to identify materials that might contain asbestos if found during their refurbishment works, and to know  how to deal with it correctly. The deadline was later extended by a week.
MP Builders failed to comply and, despite assurances to the contrary, its failure to comply persisted, remaining in breach of the notice right up to the date of the prosecution.
MP Builders Ltd of Games Road, Barnet, Herts, was fined £2,000 and ordered to pay £4,500 in costs for breaching the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974.
After the hearing, HSE Inspector Stephron Baker Holmes said:
“The improvement notice was straightforward. It was simple and inexpensive to comply with, by providing training to employees liable to be exposed to asbestos. NEBOSH National General Certificate in Occupational Health & Safety
“If the company had any doubts or questions, it had ample opportunity to ask them and I would have done all I could to help. Instead it apparently buried its head in the sand.
“As well as not meeting the extended deadline, the company continued in its failure to provide any evidence of compliance at any time during more than a year. It seems MP Builders just turned a blind eye to its responsibilities.”

A guide to workplace transport safety re-issued (HSG136 third edition)

CRS is pleased to announce the re-issue of HSG136; a guidance document which provides advice for employers on what they need to do to comply with the law and reduce risk in workplace transport safety. It will be useful for safety practitioners, as well as managers, supervisors, employees and their safety representatives, as well as contractors, vehicle operators and other organisations concerned with workplace transport safety.
The new guide is much shorter and more streamlined than the previous edition and includes advice on your general legal duties and information on health and safety management. There is also more specific advice on controlling risks associated with workplace transport, which has been restructured into three main areas:

• Safe site (design and activity)
• Safe vehicle
• Safe driver

The new edition has been updated to take account of new advice on workplace transport safety and also to reflect changes to relevant legislation and associated guidance. There are new sections on multi-deck vehicles and multi-site deliveries, as well as minor changes to other sections, such as on weighbridges and sheeting.  A copy of the new (v3) guide can be downloaded free from http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/books/hsg136.htm?eban=govdel-publications&cr=08-Oct-2014

Construction company fined and costs £200K after worker run-over by nine tonne truck

A major construction company has been fined for safety failings after a worker was critically injured when he was run over by a nine tonne dumper truck. David Windsor, 62, of St George, Bristol, suffered life changing injuries, including severe brain injury, in the incident at a building site at Mount Wise, Devonport, on 7 October 2010. He also sustained facial fractures, serious injuries to right arm, fractured ribs, a fractured pelvis, leg fractures and foot injuries all on his right side where the dumper ran over him. The injuries were life changing. He spent two weeks in intensive care, a month in a high dependency unit and was finally discharged home from a brain injury rehabilitation unit in April, 2011 – more than six months later.
Oxfordshire-based JB Leadbitter was sentenced recently (19 September 2014) after an investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found the company failed to adequately manage and control workplace transport. Plymouth Crown Court heard that Mr Windsor, a delivery driver, was delivering a mortar silo to the Leadbitter site, a former MoD property where 159 new homes were being built. He was wearing high-visibility clothing, but was hit by the dumper as he was crossing the site to return to his lorry.
HSE established that there was no segregated, defined area provided for people on foot like Mr Windsor. JB Leadbitter, as the Principal Contractor for the site, had not produced or put in place a suitable traffic management plan to ensure the separation of vehicles and pedestrians using the roadway at the site.
JB Leadbitter and Co Ltd, of Grange Court, Abingdon Science Park, Abingdon, in Oxfordshire, was found guilty of breaching Section 3(1) of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974. The company was fined £100,000 and ordered to pay full costs of around £100,000.
HSE Inspector Jonathan Harris, speaking after the hearing, said: “This terrible incident has left Mr Windsor with significant and lasting injuries and could easily have led to his death. It is unlikely he will be able to return to work again. Simple forethought and planning could have avoided this happening. JB Leadbitter failed to identify risks to site workers and visitors, such as delivery drivers, in their construction phase plan and made no provision for segregating site vehicles and pedestrians at the top end of the site. Other workers on this large site were frequently exposed to serious risks as a result of this lack of planning. Workplace transport incidents are the second most common cause of serious and fatal incidents in the construction industry, yet they could easily be avoided by having proper plans in place and provision for pedestrians on site.”
Stephen Asbury, Managing Director with CRS commented that on average, seven workers are killed every year as a result of collisions with vehicles or mobile plant on construction sites. He said that over 90 were seriously injured.

Salford recycling firm fined £10K plus costs over worker's crushed leg

A recycling firm has appeared in court after an employee almost lost his right leg when it became trapped in a machine at a Swinton factory. Nearly a year after the incident, doctors still do not know whether the 41-year-old from Middleton, who has asked not to be named, will ever regain the full use of his leg. Roydon Polythene (Exports) Ltd was prosecuted by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) after an investigation found workers at the plant at Junction Eco Park were routinely put at risk when they tried to remove blockages.
Trafford Magistrates’ Court heard today (26 September 2014) that the employee had been trying to clear a jam in a glass sorting machine on 16 October 2013. He was lifted in a mobile elevating work platform, similar in appearance to a cherry picker, before climbing out of the basket and onto a conveyor belt, more than four metres above the ground. As he tried to clear the blockage, his right leg was drawn into the machinery.  His leg remained trapped for more than two hours while emergency services tried to cut him free. He sustained significant crush injuries, requiring multiple operations to try and save his leg.  The court was told that it had become routine for workers to climb from the lifting basket onto the conveyor belt to clear blockages from an unguarded part of the machine. There were also no guard rails around the edge of the conveyor to prevent employees from falling to the ground below.
Roydon Polythene (Exports) Ltd, of Rake Lane in Swinton, was fined £10,000 and ordered to pay £1,221 in prosecution costs after pleading guilty to single breaches of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 and the Work at Height Regulations 2005. The charges relate to failing to prevent access to dangerous parts of machinery, and failing to put measures in place to prevent workers falling from height.
Speaking after the hearing, HSE Inspector Jackie Worrall said: “A worker has suffered severe injuries that will affect him for the rest of his life because his employer failed in its duty to ensure he stayed safe at work.  This wasn’t a one-off incident. Instead, workers were routinely expected to climb onto the conveyor belt to clear blockages from an unguarded part of the machine, putting their lives at risk. It was therefore almost inevitable that someone would be injured, either by becoming trapped in the machine or falling to the ground below.  Roydon Polythene should have carried out a proper assessment of the risks facing its employees, and taken action to put safety measures in place. If it had then the worker’s injuries could have been avoided.”
CRS said: “We urge companies using dangerous machinery to take advice on health and safety and to assess risks properly.  Losses and fines like these can be avoided.  Health and safety – despite the myths – is not onerous or difficult.  Our specialist advisers can provide organisations with a healthcheck-type of review that will give peace-of-mind as well as prioritising any essential actions.  Thereafter, our SafetyShare service which provides as little or as much of a health and safety professional’s time as needed, can provide on-going support to make sure that good standards are maintained.  High value for one low-cost fee. It is much cheaper and effective than employing a safety officer.” Contact Ian Cliffen at 01283 509175 or advice@crsrisk.com

Macclesfield firm who ignored their own safety advice is fined over worker's drill injury

A Macclesfield manufacturer has been fined for safety failings after a worker’s hand became entangled around a factory drill. Stormguard Ltd, which produces a range of drainage products, was prosecuted by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) after an investigation found it had ignored warnings by its own health and safety officer about how the machine was being used.
Macclesfield Magistrates’ Court heard the 36-year-old worker from Macclesfield, had only been working at the Chester Road factory for a couple of weeks when the incident happened on 16 October 2012. He was using the drill to produce metal sills, used to deflect rainwater from the bottom of doors, when the glove on his right hand became caught, pulling his hand around the rotating drill bit. The third finger on his right hand was dislocated and fractured, and his little finger was also fractured.
The HSE investigation found that the guard on the drill was inadequate and that it had become common practice for workers to wear gloves while using the drill, despite the risk of gloves becoming entangled being well known in the manufacturing industry.
The court was told that Stormguard’s own health and safety officer had identified inadequate guarding on the drill in a written report over a year before the incident. He also raised the issue of workers wearing gloves while using drills. However, no action was taken to tackle these issues.
Stormguard Ltd, of Chestergate in Macclesfield, was fined £2,000 and ordered to pay £4,377 in prosecution costs after pleading guilty to a breach of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974.
Speaking after the hearing, HSE Inspector Deborah Walker said: “There was simply no need for this incident to have happened, especially as Stormguard’s own health and safety officer had raised the issue with the company. The employee was lucky to escape with relatively minor injuries, but they could easily have been much worse. Workers at the factory were regularly using the drill without an adequate guard and while wearing gloves so there was a high risk that someone would be injured. There’s absolutely no point in manufacturers hiring health and safety officers if they’re not going to listen to their advice. Risk assessments should be acted on – not put on a shelf to gather dust.”

New laws on storing petrol from 1 October 2014

Petrol is a dangerous substance; it is a highly flammable liquid and can give off vapour which can easily be set on fire and when not handled safely has the potential to cause a serious fire and/or explosion. This means there is always a risk of a fire and/or an explosion if there is a source of ignition nearby, for example a naked flame, an electrical spark or similar. Because of these risks, storing petrol safely is covered by legislation; and these new laws apply to you from 1 October 2014 if you store petrol.

What is the law on storing petrol safely?

The Petroleum (Consolidation) Regulations 2014 (PCR)  which came into force on 1 October 2014 apply to:

• workplaces that store petrol where petrol is dispensed, i.e. retail and non-retail petrol filling stations; and
• non-workplace premises storing petrol, for example at private homes, or at clubs/associations (or similar).

Petroleum Enforcement Authorities (PEAs) (formerly Petroleum Licensing Authorities (PLAs)) are responsible for enforcing the Petroleum (Consolidation) Regulations 2014. They also continue to enforce DSEAR at workplaces covered by PCR. This means that there is no change to the current enforcing arrangements. The safe storage and use of petrol in workplaces is also covered by the Dangerous Substances and Explosive Atmospheres Regulations 2002 (DSEAR).

 

Who does this apply to?

Information on how the Petroleum (Consolidation) Regulations 2014 applies to the following groups:

• If you are an owner/employee of a petrol filling station
• If you store petrol at home, or at a club/association or similar premises
• If you design, manufacture or supply portable petrol storage containers
• If your workplace stores but does not dispense petrol

 

What does this legislation replace?

The Petroleum (Consolidation) Regulations 2014 combine, update and replace all previous legislation on petrol storage. The existing health and safety responsibilities remain the same; anything that is still relevant is included in the 2014 Regulations.

What has been withdrawn?

• List of old petroleum legislation.
• Approved Code of Practice (ACOP) COP6 – Petroleum-Spirit (Plastic Containers) Regulations 1982. Requirements for testing and marking or labelling.
• Approved Document L93 – Approved tank requirements. The provisions for bottom loading and vapour recovery systems of mobile containers carrying petrol.

 

New guidance

New guidance on portable petrol storage containers  is available giving practical advice on the design, construction, materials and marking or labelling of containers as required by the regulations.