What the EH

I recently revised the notes for one of my seminars and thought it might be useful to share a recent update regarding the COSHH regulations – particularly the EH40 guidance on Workplace Exposure Limits. For those of you not aware, but who have involvement in the COSHH regulations, EH40 was revised and the new version came into force on 18^th December 2011. It can be downloaded for free from the HSE website (http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/books/eh40.htm).

This revision was mainly introduced to implement the European Union changes to the Indicative Occupational Exposure Limit Values (IOELVs). This has involved the introduction of New Workplace Exposure Limits for certain substances (e.g. Isopentane) and removing others (e.g. Pyrethrins) as well as numerous amendments. To make it simple to see what’s changed, the Book has a foreword, which details the changes made both in 2007, and in 2011. There is one thing, however, that I would like to point out, which is of note and isn’t mentioned in the foreword!

It actually only relates to Sulphuric Acid mist, which has been added in this revision, and it is listed like this:

Substance	CAS No.	8-Hour TWA WEL (Mg.m3)	Comments
Sulphuric acid (mist)	7664-93-9	0.05	The mist is defined as the thoracic fraction

This is the first time in the UK that the requirement for thoracic fraction sampling has been introduced. In other words, there is a completely different way to have to sample for it! As of yet, the HSE have not introduced a method specifically for the UK, although I’m sure there will be one. In the meantime, if you have the need, then we have to look to the US where thoracic fraction sampling is a regular activity.

Just for the refresher – the thoracic fraction comprises particles with a size of less than 30 microns, so larger than the Respirable dust we are used to sampling for in the UK with the likes of the SKC cyclone.

If anyone needs to sample for Sulphuric Acid mist, then get in touch as we can sort you out the relevant sampling heads and media. For anyone else, this could be an indication that thoracic sampling may well be adopted for other substances in the future, so keep your eyes peeled, watch out for my updates, and if you need further training, click on the link below and check out one of our courses.

http://www.safetytrainingacademy.co.uk/coshh-course.php

We tried our best!

There are some things people say that on reflection are quite ridiculous - and we're all guilty of saying them! 'We tried our best' is surely one such saying! Is it really good enough that your football team 'tried their best' at the weekend - but lost, or that you 'tried your best' to pass that exam - but didn't? Worse still, is it really good enough for a company to have 'tried its best' to sort out health and safety when someone just got hurt?

The fact is that in all of these situations what you should be doing is setting an objective and applying the necessary resources to achieving that objective. In other words you can only achieve what your resources allow you to achieve, it's just about setting the right objective and applying those resources effectively.

The resources can be anything at your disposal; money, people, time and equipment and they should be employed after careful consideration of every factor you can possibly think of. This means considering everything that could possibly get in the way of achieving what you want to.

If you fail or if you don't meet your objectives this really should be against all the odds - you should have weighed up the odds after all (I think they call it a risk assessment) The outcome shouldn't be a surprise!

Douglas Adams school of safety

We had our Health and Safety; Implications for Directors free seminar last week, which was very interesting indeed. My guest speaker was Don Graham (JP), who certainly gripped the audience with tales of directors in all manner of peril, simply by not taking health and safety seriously at board level. You would think that the very real prospect of going to jail, or losing your personal assets (just 2 of the real-life stories from Don), would motivate board's across the land to jump out of their seats and empower safety teams to get cracking on protecting their rear ends.

One of our employees is a huge fan of the Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy and loves a quote from Arthur Dent, who proudly proclaimed "I'd far rather be happy than right any day". This phrase has been changed a little in our organisation now, and it goes something like this: "It's a shame that people often confuse being lucky with being right". We use this to apply to some of the stories we hear in the health and safety world and it wasn't until last week's seminar that it came crashing down on me as to the full implications of this little saying.


Of course, those words apply to so many things in life, but for safety, the ramifications are huge. Just because nothing has gone wrong so far, really doesn't mean that everything is all right. There are so many preventable accidents and injuries, just waiting to happen in the workplace today, not to mention the more insidious injuries like vibration white finger or noise induced deafness! Being lucky to get away with it certainly isn't the same as getting to grips and getting it right!

The government might not be as stupid as you think!

Does it seem to you like the tide of public opinion about ‘Health and Safety gone mad’ is on the turn? Even in this month's Safety and Health Practitioner, they look at the recent media coverage of health and safety and it would seem that a number of outlets are actually beginning to tackle the issue of Health and Safety in a much more mature, grown up way. For example the 26^th November viewing of QI, which actually set about to dispel a few of the ‘myths’ of health and safety.

This made me ponder as to what would bring this about and my thoughts are that it is all to do with anti-establishment vogue - perhaps the government actually did the industry a favour by bemoaning over-zealous health and safety culture (the Lord Young Review; http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKTRE65C30O20100613)!

It could be the case that there has simply been more publicity of late and that the HSE has done a Stirling job with its PR. Nice thought, but probably not realistic if we're going to be honest. It's actually far more likely that the media always want to take a pop at the establishment, even when that means questioning on one of its own pet subjects – i.e. ‘the health and safety fun police!’

So if this is the case, then could it be that the government has been so clever as to use reverse psychology on the media to drive the issue of health and safety to the fore to ensure that everyone begins to play ball – hmmm

It's also perhaps worth thinking about the public at large for a moment. I have always felt that we are permanently under attack in this business even though we're only here to stop people getting hurt, but maybe the public really do understand the difference between stupid health and safety and what we actually do for a living!

Vuvuzela noise - It's LOUD!

I've just been asked to go on the radio in the morning (BBC Radio York, don't you know) at the crazy time of 7.25, to talk about the noise from that icon of South African football supporters; the Vuvuzela. I've just done a little research and WOW - they make some noise!

The Vuvuzela, for those of you who, like me, aren't really into football, is a 3 foot long plastic horn blown by mouth and originates from a traditional horn used by villagers to call meetings. It has become tradition at football matches in South Africa, for spectators to blow these at various points in the game, in unison to 'emphaise the ebb and flow of the game'. The problem seems partly to be that, as more and more people purchase these things, the more they are sounded throughout the game.

The noise level from these horns varies a little depending on what reference you use, but anything from 113dB at 2m away to 131dB at the opening of the horn, and 127dB seems to be used quite often as a measure of what fans can be subjected to - and that's only from one horn!

To put this in context, the UK Control of Noise at Work Regulations 2005 sets a legal level of 85dB over 8 hours continuous. To reach this level of exposure at 127dB will only take one second! So anytime after one second of being subjected to this noise, you are likely to be sustaining damage to your hearing! Oh, and hearing damage is permanent, so not such a fun thing after all then!

As to whether they should ban them - the noise regulations only concern people at work, so there's no legal reason but from a purely public health point of you - absolutely, they shouldn't be allowed. How you tackle the cultural argument is another matter altogether.

Castle Group is involved in noise monitoring and other disciplines, for health and safety and environmental issues and can be found at http://www.castlegroup.co.uk/.

Do your staff wear headsets?

If any of your staff wear telephone or communications headsets (call-centres, radio-comms, in-ear monitors), then this post will be of interest. If they don’t, then you probaly needn’t read any further!


The control of Noise at Work Regulations 2005 apply to anyone in the workplace, no matter how practical or not it is to assess the risk to that employee. For organisations who employ people wearing communications headsets or in-ear monitors, this has been a problem for some time. General noise levels and exposure in the workplace is relatively simple to measure and therefore assess for risk, but where the noise is introduced directly to the ear, it is a different matter and normal sound measuring devices simply don’t measure up! The traditional method involves cumbersome and expensive equipment, which requires a consultant to operate it. The process does not measure on the actual operator, but on a ‘dummy-head’ sat next to the operator, which monitors the same sounds as the worker, but in parallel and using a ‘standard’ ear!

There is now a really clever new product for assessing the noise exposure or 'acoustic shock' of people wearing headsets, be it in a call-centre or out and about. This is a real-time system that is completely non-invasive and can be used on an on-going basis to monitor levels for the Noise at Work Regulations 2005. The simplicity of the system comes from its ability to use the actual headset being worn by the operator, whilst in-use on real calls! All you need is the H2 monitor unit (about the size of a paper-back book), some software and a cable or two!

There is a small drawback and that is that the system needs to know some information about the headsets in use; this data is found by measuring the model of headset in use in a test-laboratory and loading this information into the software. It is possible that the data already exists from previous tests, but if not, it is simple enough to do. In essence, It has never been this easy or cost-effective to monitor levels for staff in call-centres or those using headsets in any area of the business. Complying with the regulations from this point forward is simply a case of carrying out the normal risk assessment using the numbers straight from the software. This puts you back in charge of the process and provides all the information to get on with the task of stopping people going deaf!

If you would like to read more about the H2 headset monitor, then here is a link to our web-site. If you would like us to come and talk to you about it, then please feel free to call us on 01723 584250, or email me on simon@castlegroup.co.uk.
 
You can see a detailed overview of the H2 headset monitor by following this link. www.castlegroup.co.uk/sound-level-meters/h2-headset-monitor/detailed-product-flyer.html

Portable Appliance Testing (PAT) Q&A

I've been delving into Portable appliance testing lately. Partly because we, like everyone, has to do it, but partly because I thought it could be a useful topic to find out a bit more and share with you the results of my digging. As we have recently taken on a range of PAT products and training course provision, I figured the best bet may be to ask some questions of the manufacturer, so I did that and all the questions and answers are below. The interviewee’s name is Karen Chelin, who is a product manager for PAT testing products and she certainly knows her stuff!


In the meantime, if you want to check out our selection of PAT products, just go here:

http://www.castlegroup.co.uk/portable-appliance-tester/view-all-products.html

For training courses, or if you would like us to come and do some testing for you, then give us a call on 01723584250.

Q. What’s the biggest issue for business wanting to get their PAT testing up to date?

A. Trying to get an electrician to come & carry out the PAT Testing at all can be a challenge in itself. Electricians are busy people & PAT Testing probably comes low down on their list of priorities.

Q. Do employers need to be formally qualified to carry out their own PAT testing?

A. No formal qualification is required. The Health & Safety Executive state " A competent person who has been given instruction" A practical based training course like the one run through Castle is a good idea. The delegates are assessed on the course & a Certificate of Achievement is awarded if successful.

Q. What size of business should consider conducting PAT testing in-house – is there a practical cut-off point?

A. Not really. All businesses who employ staff have to PAT Test. Both ourselves and Castle have PAT testers for rental as well as purchase, so doing it yourself can still be a cheaper option regardless of the size of business.

Q. Is there one thing that people always get wrong or mis-understand about PAT testing?

A. Yes. Its that a lot of people believe one has to be an electrician to PAT test when in fact you don't. Timescales are another area people often misunderstand as it’s not simply a case of testing everything every year!

Q. How often does testing have to be carried out?

A. Ah well. That's when the training comes in handy. Its is not every 12 months as some people believe. Sometimes appliances need testing more regularly & sometimes less regularly. It really depends on the environment the equipment is used & also the type & class of equipment as well. It really isn't as complex as it sounds.

Q. Is it simply a case of everything with a plug?

A. NO. The scope of equipment which needs testing is appliances that have a flexible lead & can be moved. Again the training will be helpful to assess what we can & cannot do.

Q. I’ve heard that PAT testing really doesn’t prove anything about electrical safety – is this true?

A. PAT Testing on it's own will not pick up every fault. The PAT machine does not have eyes. That's where we come in. A visual inspection is just as important as the actual PAT tests. We can check the outside of an appliance but the only way to check that all layers of safety are intact is by carrying out a PAT Test.

Q. Is there anything simple I can read to get me up to speed with more of the detail?

A. Yes there are a couple of publications from the HSE, which are detailed below. Otherwise, contact Castle, who will be able to advise you of the best way forward regarding products and training and they can access all the resources of us as the manufacturer.

Free booklet "Maintaining portable electrical equipment in offices and other low-risk environments". INDG236 from HSE Books.

Free booklet "Maintaining portable electrical equipment in hotels and tourist accommodation". INDG237 from HSE Books.

(HSE Books Tel: 01787 881165).

I hope that was useful. Dont’ forget that if you haven’t already, you should sign up to our mailing list where you’ll get a whole load more useful emails like this one with all sorts of health and safety information and guidance. I am also setting up a private area for anyone who is signed up to the list and it’ll be packed full of articles, fact sheets, FAQ and all sorts of valuable information. So get yourself signed up now by going here:

http://www.castlegroup.co.uk/component/option,com_chronocontact/chronoformname,mailing_list/