8. Physical hazards at work

Changes and developments since last year

• MSDs: A proposed new European Directive covering all musculoskeletal disorders is likely to be adopted in late 2012.

• Radiation: In September 2011, the European Commission published a proposal for a revised Basic Safety Standards for Radiological Protection Directive.

• Electromagnetic fields: In July 2011, EU negotiations began for the implementation of a new Directive on electromagnetic fields.

Manual handling

Musculoskeletal disorders (also known as MSDs), including back pain and RSI (see Chapter 8), continue to be the largest cause of time off work, According to the HSE Statistics for 2010-11, there were 548,000 cases of self-reported absence for MSD-related illness over the preceding 12 months.

The Manual Handling Operations Regulations

The Manual Handling Operations Regulations 1992 (the MHOR) apply wherever manual handling operations are carried out — that is, physical lifting, carrying or moving any load. There are no maximum weight limits set for loads (although the HSE publishes advice on the sort of weights that are likely to cause injuries in Appendix 3 of its guidance on the regulations at: www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/priced/l23.pdf).

Instead of imposing maximum weight limits, the regulations require a risk assessment of the task, load and working environment. Employers are required to avoid hazardous manual handling operations (so far as reasonably practicable) by:

• redesigning the task to avoid moving the load or by automating or mechanising the process;

• making a risk assessment of operations that cannot be avoided;

• reducing the risk of injury to as low as reasonably practicable, giving particular consideration to providing mechanical assistance; and

• providing training and information for employees, including general indications and, where reasonably practicable, specific information about the load.

Safety reps have a right to information about new processes, including proposed workplace layouts. By being involved at the design stage, they have the chance to eliminate problems before a new machine, process or work system is installed. If manual handling cannot be eliminated, the main aim should be to cut the weight of loads and ensure that they are handled less often.

There may be a few tasks that cannot be altered and involve difficult lifting problems. In these cases, workers who are required to do them should be physically suited and specially trained.

Consultation with safety reps

HSE guidance emphasises the importance of consultation with safety reps “because they know at first hand the risks in the workplace and can offer practical solutions to controlling them”. Safety reps will find the appendices in the guidance particularly useful. The risk assessment filter from earlier guidance has been expanded, and a manual handling assessment chart is included. There are also checklists on lifting and carrying, and pushing and pulling, with some examples indicating the degree of detail necessary for a proper assessment.

Prolonged standing at work

In 2010, the actions of two trade unionists at the BBC resulted in working conditions at contract catering company Aramark being investigated by the HSE. In 2008, the company ordered the removal of chairs from some of its catering outlets, meaning that staff operating the tills had to stand for hours without a break. The HSE ordered that the seats be re-installed.

The HSE Guidance on the Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992 states: “If work can or must be done sitting, seats which are suitable for the people using them and for the work they do should be provided.” These regulations apply generally across all workplaces.

Proposed new European Directive on Musculoskeletal disorders

There is no specific UK legislation to deal with the problem of musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs or RSI); although general health and safety legislation applies (see Chapter 1). There are, however, regulations originating from European directives on display screen equipment (DSE) (see Chapter 6), vibration and manual handling (see above). A proposed new directive to cover all musculoskeletal disorders except vibration has been in the pipeline since 1990, to address problems relating to both manual handling and display screen equipment (see Chapter 6). The HSE expects it to be adopted in late 2012.

Railworkers win compensation for RSI

In 2009, rail union ASLEF won a ground-breaking judgment on RSI. Three train drivers successfully won more than £22,000 compensation from Arriva Trains Wales after Swansea County Court ruled that they had developed Carpal Tunnel Syndrome (CTS) as a result of their work. The union said their injuries were caused by repetitive work, adopting awkward wrist postures and operating brake and power controls in cramped conditions. Drivers had complained of poor seating with little or no adjustment and no arm rests. ASLEF’s general secretary Keith Norman said the ruling sets a precedent for train drivers across the country who suffer from CTS.

ART tool

A downloadable tool to help prevent musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) of the upper limbs has been developed by the HSE and the Health and Safety Laboratory (HSL). The Assessment of Repetitive Tasks (ART) tool is aimed at businesses and organisations where workers carry out repetitive tasks. The HSE says it can help identify where the significant risks lie, suggest where to focus risk reduction measures and help to prioritise improvements. The tool complements existing HSE guidance on upper limbs and is available online at: www.hse.gov.uk/msd/uld/art or in hard copy (INDG438).

Fire

The Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 came into force in 2006. It applies risk assessment principles and establishes a single fire safety regime for all workplaces and other non-domestic premises. It applies to England and Wales. Scotland and Northern Ireland have devolved responsibility for fire safety law.

The Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order

The Order divides into Articles, rather than regulations, but the basic hierarchy is similar to other health and safety law.

The Order applies to most “non-domestic premises”, including the voluntary sector and self-employed people with premises separate from their homes. Workplaces not covered are offshore installations, ships, fields, woods or other land in agriculture away from buildings, aircraft, locomotive or rolling stock, mines and boreholes.

Responsibility for complying with the Order rests with the “responsible person”, defined in Article 3. In a workplace, this is the employer and any other person who may have control of any part of the premises, for example, the occupier or owner.

In all other premises, the people in control of the premises will be responsible. If there is more than one responsible person in any type of premises, all must take all reasonable steps to work with each other.

General fire precautions

The Order requires the responsible person to take general fire precautions for the safety of employees and other “relevant persons”, such as members of the public, who are lawfully on the premises or in the vicinity (Article 8).

These measures are set out in Article 5 and cover:

• reducing the risk of fire on the premises and the risk of the spread of fire;

• identifying the means of escape;

• making sure the means of escape can be safely and effectively used;

• making sure the premises are equipped with appropriate firefighting equipment and with fire detectors and alarms;

• making sure there are means for detecting fire and for giving warning in case of fire; and arrangements for action to be taken in the event of fire, including the instruction and training of employees; and mitigating the effects of the fire.

The Order requires fire precautions to be put in place “where necessary” and to the extent that it is reasonably practicable.

Risk assessment

Under Article 9, the responsible person must make a “suitable and sufficient” assessment of the risk of (and from) fire in the workplace. The risk assessment must pay special attention to dangerous substances and to people who may be especially at risk, such as young and disabled people. The risk assessment and the preventive and protective measures identified as being necessary must be recorded where an employer has more than five employees.

Preventive and protection measures

Article 10 requires the responsible person to follow a hierarchy of preventive and protection measures, as set out in Schedule 1, Part 3.

The principles are:

• avoiding risks;

• evaluating the risks which cannot be avoided;

• combating the risks at source;

• adapting to technical progress;

• replacing the dangerous with the non-dangerous or less dangerous;

• developing a coherent overall prevention policy which covers technology, organisation of work and the influence of factors relating to the working environment;

• giving collective protective measures priority over individual protective measures; and

• giving appropriate instructions to employees.

Article 13 requires the responsible person to ensure that the workplace is equipped with appropriate firefighting equipment and with fire detectors and alarms.

The responsible person must also:

• take measures for firefighting in the premises (adapted to the nature of the activities carried on there and the size of the undertaking and of the premises concerned);

• nominate competent persons to implement those measures and ensure that the number of such persons, their training and the equipment available to them are adequate, taking into account the size of, and the specific hazards involved in, the premises; and

• arrange any necessary contacts with external emergency services, particularly as regards firefighting, rescue work, first-aid and emergency medical care.

Article 14 imposes duties regarding emergency routes and exits and Article 15 concerns procedures to deal with “serious and imminent danger”. These include safety drills and evacuation procedures.

Article 18 requires the responsible person to appoint competent persons to help implement the preventive and protective measures. A competent person is defined as someone who “has sufficient training and experience or knowledge and other qualities to enable him properly to assist in undertaking the preventive and protective measures”.

The competent person must be given adequate means and “the time available for them to fulfil their functions”. The responsible person must appoint a competent employee in preference to an outside person, such as a contractor.

Information and training

Under Article 19, the responsible person must provide “comprehensible and relevant information” to employees arising from the risk assessment, such as the protection measures, emergency procedures and about dangerous substances on the premises.

Employees must also receive adequate fire safety training at their induction and whenever they are exposed to new or increased risks. It should be “repeated periodically” and “take place during working hours”.

The Fire Order also imposes duties on employees, under Article 23. These include taking reasonable care for their own safety and that of other people, to cooperate with the employer’s fire procedures, to report matters of serious and imminent danger and any shortcomings in the protection arrangements.

Enforcement

The enforcing authority is defined in Article 25. In most cases, this is the local fire and rescue authority, although the HSE has responsibility for construction sites and for ships under construction or repair.

Sports grounds come under the local authority and Crown properties are covered by Her Majesty’s Inspectors of Fire Services. The enforcing authority can serve “alterations notices” where it believes premises constitute a serious risk (Article 29). It can also serve enforcement and prohibition notices (Articles 30 and 31).

Article 41 imposes the duty to consult with employees, amending the Safety Representatives and Safety Committees Regulations 1977 and the Health and Safety (Consultation with Employees) Regulations 1996 (see Chapter 4).

Businesses no longer need a fire certificate, but fire and rescue authorities can still inspect premises and ensure that adequate fire precautions are in place.

Noise

The Control of Noise at Work Regulations 2005 came into force for most sectors in 2006. In April 2008, they were extended to the music and entertainment sectors. The regulations are based on the EU Physical Agents (Noise) Directive.

Unions welcomed the regulations, particularly after a specific provision was included following union concerns, to make employers consult with safety reps on risk assessment, on actions to reduce risk and on the choice of hearing protection. However, the CWU communication workers’ union points out that the regulations do not tackle the growing problem of acoustic shock. Acoustic shock is a sudden “spike” of noise, common in call centres, that can cause tinnitus and hypersensitivity to loud sounds. The regulations cover virtually all workplaces with few exceptions, including workplaces where the risk of noise may not be immediately obvious. For example, they apply to motorcycle couriers and to call centre workers exposed to noise through headphones.

Noise levels

Under the regulations, the first action level, known as lower “exposure action value” (EAV) is:

• a daily or weekly personal noise exposure of 80 dB(A), compared to the previous level of 85 dB(A); and an EAV for peak sound pressure of 135 dB.

The second, upper EAV is:

• a daily or weekly personal noise exposure of 85 dB(A), compared to the previous level of 90 dB(A); and an EAV for peak sound pressure of 137 dB.

The regulations also specify an “exposure limit value” (ELV) that must not be exceeded, of 87 dB(A) daily or weekly exposure and peak sound pressure of 140 dB.

The HSE says the simple rules of thumb that may indicate a noise problem are:

• being surrounded by intrusive noise for most of the working day;

• having to raise your voice to be heard by someone just two metres away, for at least part of the day;

• using noisy powered tools or machinery for more than 30 minutes a day;

• working in a noisy industry such as construction, road repair, engineering or manufacturing;

• impacts caused by work such as hammering, drop forging and

pneumatic impact tools; and

• work with explosive sources such as cartridge-operated tools, detonators or guns.

Risk assessment

Regulation 5 requires an employer who carries out work which is liable to expose any employees to noise at or above a lower exposure action value (EAV) to make a “suitable and sufficient” assessment of the risk from that noise to the health and safety of those employees.

The risk assessment has to consider:

• the level, type and duration of exposure, including any exposure to peak sound pressure;

• the effects of exposure to noise on employees or groups of employees whose health is at particular risk from such exposure;

• so far as is practicable, any effects on the health and safety of employees resulting from the interaction between noise and the use of ototoxic substances, which adversely affect hearing and balance at work, or between noise and vibration;

• any indirect effects on the health and safety of employees resulting from the interaction between noise and audible warning signals or other sounds that need to be audible in order to reduce risk at work;

• any information provided by the manufacturers of work equipment;

• the availability of alternative equipment designed to reduce the emission of noise;

• any extension of exposure to noise at the workplace beyond normal working hours, including exposure in rest facilities supervised by the employer;

• appropriate information obtained following health surveillance, including, where possible, published information; and

• the availability of personal hearing protectors with adequate attenuation characteristics.

Regulation 5 includes a specific clause, stating that “the employees concerned or their representatives shall be consulted on the assessment of risk under the provisions of this regulation”.

Controlling noise

The risk assessment must also identify the measures needed to meet the requirements of the regulations. Where the assessment shows that employees are likely to be exposed at the upper EAV or above, employers must reduce noise through a “programme of organisational and technical measures” (Regulation 6).

Employers have to consider:

• other working methods which reduce exposure to noise;

• the choice of appropriate work equipment emitting the least possible noise, taking account of the work to be done;

• the design and layout of workplaces, work stations and rest facilities;

• suitable and sufficient information and training for employees, such that work equipment may be used correctly, in order to minimise their exposure to noise;

• reduction of noise by technical means;

• appropriate maintenance programmes for work equipment, the workplace and workplace systems;

• limitation of the duration and intensity of exposure to noise; and

• appropriate work schedules with adequate rest periods.

Employers must not expose workers to levels of noise above the ELV. If the ELV is exceeded, employers must reduce exposure to below that level and prevent it happening again.

Regulation 6 contains a specific clause requiring “employees concerned or their representatives to be consulted on the measures to be taken to meet the requirements of this regulation”.

Hearing protection

Regulation 7 governs the use of hearing protection. It says ear protectors should not be a substitute for controlling noise by technical and organisational means.

Employers must provide their employees with hearing protection if they ask for it and the noise exposure is between the lower and upper EAVs.

If employers cannot reduce noise levels below the upper EAV, they must provide employees with personal hearing protectors. Regulation 7 requires employers to make personal hearing protectors available “after consultation with the employees concerned or their representatives”.

Employers also have to designate, demarcate and identify a “hearing protection zone” if an employee is likely to be exposed at the upper EAV or above. These zones must be identified by “ear protection must be used” signs.

The employer must also ensure that employees do not enter an ear protection zone unless they are wearing personal ear protectors. An amendment to Regulation 7 makes it a requirement that hearing protection supplied for use at work complies with the Personal Protective Equipment Regulations 2002 (see Chapter 7).

Employers must ensure that personal ear protection is fully and properly used and that noise control equipment and ear protectors are maintained in efficient, working order and in good repair (Regulation 8).

Regulation 9 requires employers to provide “suitable health surveillance” — including hearing tests — if the risk assessment shows that there is a risk to workers’ health.

Information and training

Where employees are exposed to noise which is likely to be at or above a lower exposure action value, Regulation 10 requires the employer to provide those employees and their representatives with “suitable and sufficient information, instruction and training”.

This should include:

• the nature of risks from exposure to noise;

• the organisational and technical measures taken in order to comply with the requirements of Regulation 6;

• the exposure limit values and upper and lower exposure action values set out in Regulation 4;

• the significant findings of the risk assessment, including any measurements taken, with an explanation of those findings;

• the availability and provision of personal hearing protectors under Regulation 7 and correct use in accordance with Regulation 8(2);

• why and how to detect and report signs of hearing damage;

• the entitlement to health surveillance under Regulation 9 and its purposes;

• safe working practices to minimise exposure to noise; and

• the collective results of any health surveillance undertaken in accordance with Regulation 9 in a form calculated to prevent those results from being identified as relating to a particular person.

The Health and Safety (Miscellaneous Amendments and Revocations) Regulations 2009 (SI 2009 No. 693) came into force in April 2009 and made some minor amendments to the Control of Noise at Work Regulations 2005.

There continue to be cases under earlier legislation. The Court of Appeal held that textile firms were liable under Section 29 of the Factory Act 1961 for damage to a worker’s hearing sustained from January 1978. The judge said that as early as 1973, the employers should have measured the noise in their workshops.

The judgment is significant because it held the textile companies responsible for hearing loss due to noise at lower levels than those generally recognised as giving rise to liability (Baker v Quantum Clothing Group and others [2009] EWCA Civ 499).

Voice damage

A different but equally serious risk associated with workplace noise is that of voice damage. In 2010, 50 year old teacher Joyce Walters was awarded an out-of-court settlement of £156,000 after suffering permanent damage to her vocal chords through being forced to raise her voice to be heard above high levels of noise and disruption outside her classroom in Hillingdon, North West London. She developed nodules on her vocal chords, but instead of moving her to a different classroom, her managers told her that “vocal chord nodules are considered an occupational hazard for all teachers”.

Research highlights risk of voice damage in call centres

Research commissioned by the Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (IOSH) in 2012 found that one in four call centre workers suffer voice problems because managers fail to protect their health properly. 60% complained of problems with making themselves heard against background noise and 41% said they could not be heard by the customer at the end of the phone. New starters, especially female, are particularly at risk.

Vibration

The Control of Vibration at Work Regulations 2005 came into force in 2005. They are based on the second EU Physical Agents Directive. The regulations aim to protect workers from risks to their health resulting from exposure to vibration transmitted to the hand-arm and whole body.

Daily exposure to vibration is measured by a formula known as an A(8) value. This is the average (A) exposure over an eight-hour (8) day and takes into account the magnitude of the vibration and how long workers are exposed to it. The rate of vibration of a tool or piece of machinery is measured in metres (m) per second (s) — its movement per second. Suppliers must provide information on the vibration emission value of their equipment.

The regulations specify daily exposure levels at which employers will be required to take action to control risks, known as the “exposure action values” (EAVs), and where they must prevent further daily exposure, known as the “exposure limit values” (ELVs) (Regulation 4):

• for hand-arm vibration the daily exposure limit value is 5 m/s2 A(8) and the daily exposure action value is 2.5 m/s² A(8); and

• for whole body vibration the daily exposure limit value is 1.15 m/s² A(8) and the daily exposure action value is 0.5 m/s² A(8).

The regulations contain schedules explaining how employers should work out their employees’ daily exposure to vibration.

The regulations require employers to:

• eliminate or, where elimination is not reasonably practicable, reduce exposure to vibration to as low a level as is reasonably practicable (Regulation 6(1));

• introduce a programme of measures to be taken at the action values to reduce exposure to vibration to as low a level as is reasonably practicable (Regulation 6(2));

• take action at the limit values and stop the work on exceeding the limit values (Regulation 6(4));

• carry out health surveillance (Regulation 7); and

• provide workers with information, instruction and training (Regulation 8).

The HSE agreed transitional periods to allow employers to continue to use equipment and work processes first used before 6 July 2007 that expose their workers above the exposure limit values, but only until 6 July 2010. For whole body vibration, employers in agriculture and forestry still have until 2014 to comply.

Radiation

The Ionising Radiation Regulations 1999 require employers to:

• undertake a suitable and sufficient risk assessment before starting any new type of work with ionising radiation;

• restrict exposure to ionising radiation, firstly through means such as the use of adequate shielding, safety devices, containment and ventilation, where these are reasonably practicable, then by the provision of systems of work and personal protective equipment;

• maintain and examine engineering controls and personal protective equipment;

• consider the risks to pregnant and breast-feeding employees and alter working conditions where appropriate;

• consult (and appoint) one or more radiation protection advisers;

• designate controlled and supervised areas where necessary;

• implement dose limits; and

• make arrangements for designating certain employees as classified persons, arranging for the assessment and recording of doses they receive, and medical surveillance.

These regulations limit the dose of radiation to the whole body (the effective dose) to which workers aged 18 and over can be exposed to 20 millisieverts (mSv) in a calendar year. However, in special cases, a dose limit of 100mSv in five years may apply, with no more than 50mSv in a single year, subject to strict conditions.

For trainees, the limit is 6mSv in a calendar year, and for any other person, including members of the public, the limit is 1mSv a year.

The HSE has published guidance on planning for emergencies involving radiation releases with the potential to affect the public, which supports the Radiation (Emergency Preparedness and Public Information) Regulations 2001 (REPPIR).

The REPPIR implement the emergency planning aspects of a European directive setting out basic safety standards for the protection of the health of workers and the general public against the dangers from ionising radiation.

The regulations apply to fixed sites, rail transport and the transfer of radioactive substances across public places (other than by standard means of transport).

In September 2011, the European Commission published a proposal for a revised Basic Safety Standards for Radiological Protection Directive. More information can be found at: www.hse.gov.uk/aboutus/europe/euronews/dossiers/radiationprotect.htm

The HSE has produced specific guidance for pregnant and breastfeeding women, Working safely with ionising radiation: Guidelines for expectant and breastfeeding mothers. It is available at: www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/indg334.pdf

Electromagnetic fields

Electromagnetic fields (EMFs) are a form of radiation that can affect the central nervous system and the body’s temperature at certain frequencies. EMF exposure can occur in any workplace that uses electrical equipment. There is currently no specific UK legislation on EMFs, so the general duties in the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 and the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 apply. The National Radiological Protection Board (NRPB), now part of the Radiation Protection Division of the Health Protection Agency, has produced guidelines on occupational exposure to EMFs.

Proposed Electromagnetic Fields Directive

A draft EU directive was published in June 2011 to protect workers from electromagnetic fields (EMFs). Unions have been very critical of a decision to delay the implementation deadline of the new directive, which requires formal approval and will have an implementation deadline of 2016. The proposal is aimed at workers such as radiographers, doctors and nurses delivering MRI scans, people working with radar, welders and workers repairing power lines. The European Trade Union Confederation has criticised the text of the draft Directive for “short-changing workers” and putting them at “deadly risk” because it only covers the short-term effects of exposure, and disregards the long-term impact of EMFs on workers’ health. This is despite evidence published by the International Agency for Research on Cancers in 2011 that radiofrequency EMFs may be carcinogenic.

Optical radiation

The Control of Artificial Optical Radiation at Work Regulations 2010 (CAORWR) came into force in April 2010. The CAORWR are intended to implement a European Union (EU) Directive to protect workers from hazardous sources of artificial light, such as UV radiation and powerful lasers. These light sources can damage the eyes and skin if not properly managed. The regulations only cover artificial sources of optical radiation and not natural sources, such as the sun.

Common sources of light in workplaces like office lights, photocopiers and computers will not be affected by these new regulations. However, they apply to organisations using hazardous light sources as part of their work activities. HSE guidance provides examples of safe light sources as well as sources of light that, if used inappropriately, for example, placed extremely close to the eyes or skin, have the potential to cause harm but which are safe under normal conditions of use. It also sets out examples of hazardous sources of light that present a reasonably “foreseeable” risk of harming the eyes and skin of workers and where control measures are needed, as follows:

• metal working — welding (both arc and oxy-fuel) and plasma cutting;

• pharmaceutical and research — UV fluorescence and sterilisation systems.

• hot industries — furnaces;

• printing — UV curing of inks;

• motor vehicle repairs — UV curing of paints and welding;

• medical and cosmetic treatments — laser surgery, blue light and UV therapies,

• intense pulsed light sources (IPLs);

• industry, research and education, for example, all use of Class 3B and Class 4 lasers, as defined in British Standard BS EN 60825-1: 2007; and

• Any Risk Group 3 lamp or lamp system (including LEDs), as defined in British Standard BS EN 62471: 2008, for example search lights, professional projections systems.

It advises that less common hazardous sources are associated with specialist activities, for example, lasers exposed during the manufacture or repair of equipment, which would otherwise not be accessible.

The regulations contain minimum standards for the prevention and early diagnosis of damage to the eyes and skin from optical radiation. They set exposure limit values and require employers to carry out risk assessments. The regulations enact worker rights to information, training, consultation and health checks.

Sunlight

The TUC has produced a guide for safety reps on avoiding the risks of skin cancer when working outside: Skin cancer and outdoor workers, available at: www.tuc.org.uk/extras/skincancer.pdf.

Electricity

Electricity is a major hazard. Not only can it kill directly through electrical shocks, but it can also cause fires and explosions. About 1,000 accidents at work involving electric shock or burns are reported to the HSE each year, around thirty of which are fatal.

The Electricity at Work Regulations 1989 (EAWR) apply general health and safety principles to electrical safety. The EAWR aim to prevent death and injury as a result of electrical shock, burns, fire, arcing or explosion.

The EAWR require electrical systems to be constructed and maintained so as to prevent danger. Work activities on or near them must not cause danger, and any equipment provided for protecting people at work on or near electrical equipment must be suitable for the use for which it is provided and used properly.

The EAWR also require that the strength and capability of electrical equipment must not be exceeded and that it must be protected where it could be exposed to mechanical damage, the weather, hot and cold temperatures, wet, dusty or corrosive conditions or flammable or explosive substances.

Electrical equipment must be properly insulated or suitably placed to prevent shocks and burns. Where necessary, the electricity supply to any piece of equipment must be capable of being switched off and the equipment isolated. Precautions must be taken to prevent equipment from becoming electrically charged when it has been made dead so that work can be carried out on or near it.

Work on or near a live conductor must be avoided where possible. However, where necessary, suitable precautions must be taken to prevent injury and adequate lighting, working space and means of access must be provided for all electrical equipment.

Only competent people with technical knowledge or experience should carry out electrical work. The National Inspection Council for Electrical Installations Contracting (NICEIC) enrols electrical contractors whose work is of an approved standard, and surveys work to ensure it complies with the Institution of Electrical Engineers (IEE) Regulations. These regulations do not have statutory force but indicate good practice. Safety reps should ensure that if outside specialists are required, NICEIC-enrolled contractors are used.

Electricity at work and the Löfstedt review

In his review of health and safety regulation, Reclaiming health and safety for all, Professor Löfstedt has suggested amending the Electricity at Work Regulations 1989 to clarify that annual testing of portable electrical appliances such as kettles and microwaves by businesses is not a health and safety requirement. Health and Safety inspectors’ union Prospect had already pointed to this as a “prime example” of businesses applying their own measures which are not in fact required by health and safety law but which are then held up as examples of “disproportionate” regulation.

Gas

The Gas Safety (Installation and Use) Regulations 1998 aim to safeguard the public from the dangers arising from the use of gas, although they also set out some duties for employers.

Employers must ensure that gas-fitting work is carried out by a competent person. This must be someone who is, or is employed by, an organisation that is registered with the Gas Safe Register, part of Capita, and has therefore undergone suitable training and has sufficient experience.

Gas fittings must be of good construction, sound material, of adequate strength and size and appropriate for the type of gas being used. The installation of lead pipes is prohibited and there are controls on the use of non-metallic pipes and fittings.

Steps must be taken to prevent the release of gas during work on a gas fitting and fittings must be sealed and tested for gas tightness after work is completed. The use of ignition sources is prohibited where there is a risk of fire or explosion.

Gas fittings must be protected from damage due to corrosion, or blockage by dust or dirt. Where alterations are made to premises where gas is used, such as the removal of windows, air bricks or extraction fan units, the health and safety implications have to be taken into account. New gas supplies must have an emergency control provided, which can be the meter control if there is a meter.

The regulations also set out detailed requirements on:

• meters and meter housings and safe use of pipes;

• gas appliances — new gas appliances should conform to the Gas Appliances (Safety) Regulations 1995. These require that appliances are installed in compliance with the gas instructions. Employers must not use or permit the use of any unsafe appliance; and

• maintenance.

In 2008, the HSE awarded a 10-year contract to the Capita Group to provide and run the new Gas Safe Register for gas installers, replacing the CORGI scheme, starting in April 2009.

Liquid petroleum gas (LPG) regulation after the 2004 ICL explosion

In July 2009, Lord Gill’s report of the public inquiry into the explosion at ICL Plastics Ltd in Glasgow in 2004 was published (www.theiclinquiry.org). The explosion killed nine people and injured many more. It was caused by corroded pipework which led to a build up of liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) in the building’s basement and caused the four-storey factory to collapse.

The inquiry found many weaknesses in the existing safety regime, and proposed a new regime for the use of LPG in industrial and commercial premises. As a result of the explosion and recommendations made by Lord Gill, the HSE agreed a plan for the replacement of underground metallic service pipework carrying LPG.

Organisations with buried metallic service pipework, which can corrode over time, must replace it with more durable materials, such as polyethylene. The oldest buried metallic service pipework in the least well-maintained condition and located in the most corrosive soils is being targeted first and is due to be replaced by the end of 2013.

In March 2010, the Scottish TUC welcomed the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) response to Gill’s recommendations, which rejected the introduction of an independent verification scheme on LPG contactors and independent audits of LPG risk assessments. It was concerned that audits could allow employers to seek to blame independent health and safety contractors for their own shortcomings. It said that the duty to assess hazardous processes has to be seen to be on the employer and the introduction of overly bureaucratic independent verification scheme and risk assessment audits would only lead to confusion and allow unscrupulous employers to distance themselves from their legal obligations.

In 2011, the HSE conducted Liquid Petroleum Gas and Pipeline online surveys to learn more about how to prevent a repeat of the ICL Plastics disaster.