News

The Energy Performance of Buildings (Scotland) Amendment Regulations SSI 2013/12 came into force on 27 January 2013.

They amend the Energy Performance of Buildings (Scotland) Regulations SSI 2008/309 to require the inclusion of Green Deal information on an energy performance certificate (EPC) and a recommendations report where a property is the subject of a Green Deal.

Specifically, the amendments:

• introduce a requirement to identify a Green Deal on an EPC;
• introduce a requirement to provide Green Deal information in the recommendations report which must accompany an EPC;
• enable Green Deal information entered on the register to be altered to allow such information, reported on disclosure documents, to be current;
• specify restrictions on the disclosure of information held on the register to ensure that Green Deal information is only disclosed by the keeper of the register in appropriate circumstances;
• introduce a new Schedule which sets out the Green Deal information which must be in a recommendations report for disclosure purposes where a building is subject to a Green Deal.

With Muse due to perform at the BRIT awards this month, fans may be expecting the usual explosive act from them involving pyrotechnics. Indeed, the band had planned an all-guns-blazing performance which would involve the setting off of 50 fireworks at the O2 Arena.

However, they have been told that their fireworks plan must be scaled back to only 10 due to health and safety fears.

The Daily Mirror newspaper was told by a source that, "Bosses were concerned at the amount of pyrotechnics on stage so told Muse in no uncertain terms to cull the fireworks. There will be around 20,000 people inside The O2 and organisers couldn't risk causing a blaze or injury.''

For more information, see:

• INDG407 - Storing and selling fireworks safely;
• HSG124 - Giving your own firework display;
• the Fireworks Act 2003;
• the Fireworks Regulations SI 2004/1836;

• the Pyrotechnic Articles (Safety) Regulations SI 2010/1554.

A fairground owner has landed in a heap of trouble after failing to take notice of warnings by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) to fit an additional safety barrier on one of his rides.

The accident happened in July 2011 at Lockstall Hall Carnival near Preston, when a 12-year-old girl was thrown several metres to the ground from the end seat of the High Roller as it swung through the air.

The girl suffered five fractures to her pelvis, a lacerated bladder, a cracked bone in her spine, a broken finger and bruising to her lungs.

At a hearing at Leyland Magistrates Court, fairground owner Gary Gore pleaded guilty to breaching the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 by failing to ensure the safety of passengers on the ride.

The court heard how the HSE had issued a nationwide alert after an incident on the same type of ride in Halifax, West Yorkshire, in summer 2010 where a disabled teenager fell from an end seat. Afterwards, operators were banned from allowing passengers in the end seats of similar rides until safety bars had been fitted.

Mr Gore was fined £18,000 and ordered to pay £12,000 in costs.

HSE inspector Mike Lisle said, "The 12-year-old girl may well be affected by her injuries for the rest of her life because Mr Gore did not act on the safety alert issued by the HSE. He was given a copy of the warning in person by a HSE inspector nearly a year before the incident, but the young girl was still allowed to sit in the end seat of the ride."

"Mr Gore had failed to fit new safety bars to the ride, despite having over a year in which he could have arranged for this to be done. As a result, passengers were likely to have been put at risk for several months. Safety alerts are issued for a reason and there’s no excuse for them not to be followed. This prosecution should act as a warning to business owners of the potential consequences of ignoring them."

Health and Safety Executive (HSE) construction inspectors are carrying out an intensive inspection initiative during February and March 2013.

This will focus on the refurbishment and building site risks that make construction work one the most dangerous industries. Inspectors will be targeting high risk activity, such as working at height and the risks associated with the removal of asbestos. They will also check for general good order on-site, assess welfare facilities and whether suitable PPE, such as head protection, is being worn.

Falls from height remain one of the most common causes of fatalities and major injuries in the construction industry, with more than five incidents every day. 54% of the workers who lost their lives in construction over recent years were carrying out refurbishment, repair and maintenance jobs at the time.

The HSE have stressed that they will not hesitate to take action if they find poor practice that puts the lives of workers and the public at risk. However, many incidents are completely avoidable if simple common sense precautions are taken.

For more information, see:

• Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974;
• Personal Protective Equipment at Work Regulations SI 1992/2966;
• Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations SI 1999/3242;
• Work at Height Regulations SI 2005/735;
• Construction (Design and Management) Regulations SI 2007/320;
• L144 - Managing health and safety in construction;
• Control of Asbestos Regulations SI 2012/632.

Elland Steel Structures Ltd of Halifax have been fined £8,000 and ordered to pay £20,000 toward costs as a result of a serious accident at their factory in January 2011.

Bradford Crown court heard that Mark Priestley, 34, was working with a colleague to weld pin connections to a 23 metre long steel beam, which weighed 6.5 tonnes. Because of the work, the beam had to be rotated several times by using chain slings. However, as the chain was being raised, it caught the beam which then became imbalanced and toppled sideways onto Mr Priestley's back as he tried to get out of the way.

The weight of the beam crushed Mr Priestley's spine and torso, leaving him with permanent damage. It is unlikely that the married father of one will ever be able to work again.

The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found that it was likely that one or both of the chain slings next to the beam had snagged as it was about to be lifted. The court was informed that the company did not assess the risks for lifting operations so they were not properly planned or supervised. In addition, the slings and the technique were unsuitable for the load.

HSE Inspector Geoff Fletcher said, "The incident could have been avoided had Elland Steel fulfilled its responsibilities to fully assess the risks involved with this heavy lifting, and then put measures in place to mitigate those risks."

He added, "Lifting operations need to be properly planned by a competent person and all staff need to be trained and adequately supervised. The lack of a robust system of work will inevitably mean that risk is not properly controlled and the consequences can be devastating."

For more information, see:

• the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974;
• the Lifting Operations and Lifting Equipment Regulations SI 1998/2307;
• INDG290 - Simple guide to the Lifting Operations and Lifting Equipment Regulations 1998.

A textile firm in Wakefield, West Yorkshire has been fined £100,000 and ordered to pay £15,000 in costs after one of its workers was killed by a falling stack of bales.

James Welka, 61, had worked at WE Rawson Ltd's warehouse as a forklift-truck worker for five years when he was struck by bales of rags, weighing more than 300kg, after a column of bales collapsed.

The incident occurred in 2010 when Mr Welka was standing next to a five-metre high column of bales while making a phone call to a supervisor. A colleague was operating a forklift nearby in the process of moving some bales. The column suddenly toppled toward his truck but the top two bales fell in the opposite direction and struck Mr Welka, who had been out of sight behind the column.

He was taken to Pinderfields Hospital but was pronounced dead the same day.

The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found that WE Rawson Ltd had stacked the rag bales unsafely, using vertical columns, which were inherently unstable, rather than tiered stacking. It had failed to consider the risks posed by the unstable columns to employees walking around the warehouse, and failed to put effective measures in place to control the pedestrian activities around the warehouse.

After the incident, HSE inspector Geoff Fletcher said, "This tragic incident could have been avoided had WE Rawson taken its duty of care toward its employees sufficiently seriously. The sad consequence of the company's failures is an unnecessary loss of life and the devastating impact this has had on Mr Welka's partner, family and friends.

The company was aware that the rag bales were unstable as there was a history of them collapsing. There were simple and straightforward steps that could have been taken to ensure that the stability of the bales did not present a risk to pedestrian workers in the warehouse area. Those measures were not taken.

After Mr Welka's death, the company adopted different stacking practices improving the stability of the stacks, reduced the need for pedestrians in the warehouse and improved the control of pedestrians in the warehouse. That is to be welcomed and expected, but cannot compensate for the loss of a life."

For more information see the:

• Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974.