Insight | Ashbrooke Management Consultants

5 August 20221 July 2024

River habitat survey manual

The Environment Agency has re-released its river habitat survey manual originally published in2003 and made it available on their website as a free download.

River Habitat Survey (RHS) is a method designed to characterise and assess, in broad terms, the physical structure of freshwater streams and rivers. The field survey element
does not require specialist geomorphological or botanical expertise, but recognition of vegetation types and an understanding of basic geomorphological principles and processes are needed.

RHS is carried out along a standard 500m length of river channel. Observations are made
at ten equally spaced spot-checks along the channel, whilst information on valley form and land-use in the river corridor provides additional context.

The underlying need for any observational method such as RHS is confidence in the survey data. This means consistent recording of features by competent, well-trained, and accredited surveyors as well as checks on subsequent data-entry onto the computer database.

river habitat survey — River habitat survey

The field survey has been designed, tested and improved as a result of extensive use on rivers in the UK since 1994. The 2003 version represents the first major overhaul of the form design, revision of some component elements, and updating of the guidance manual, since 1997. The major differences between the 1997 and 2003 versions are summarised in Appendix 7 of the guidance.

Surveyor accreditation is needed for data to be entered onto the RHS database. This means surveyors attending a training course using the 2003 version, and passing an accreditation test.

RHS has also been tested in other European countries such as Finland, France, Austria, Portugal (Madeira), Italy and Slovenia with a view to adapting the survey for local conditions. Cross-comparison between RHS and other methods for surveying river hydromorphology in Europe has also been carried out,4 with a view to producing standard guidance on techniques for assessing the physical characteristics of watercourses.

RHS also helps to provide information on river structure, vegetation character and land use required for SERCON (System for Evaluating Rivers for Conservation), an assessment system that has scoring systems for several attributes in relation to determining the nature conservation value of rivers.

Guidance is provided on the fieldwork survey element of the core RHS method only. It does not cover map-based information gathering or additional modules such as the one being developed for gathering specialist geomorphological information.

It is imperative that all surveys are conducted in conditions which are safe for surveyors. A health and safety assessment is an integral part of the survey and the form must be completed before embarking on the survey, and attached with the completed survey forms.

An online copy of the manual can be found here. If you require environmental advice please contact one of the Ashbrooke team.

5 August 20225 August 2022

Failure to manage asbestos risk leads to prosecution

Two engineering companies and their director have been sentenced for failing to manage asbestos risk to employees within the workplace.

A large quantity of asbestos containing materials, including asbestos insulating board, were identified during a HSE inspection at factory premises in Kidderminster owned by Kespar Engineering Limited in February 2019. The premises were occupied by SDF Automotive Limited (who went into administration in November 2019). Employees of both companies worked in the premises and the sole director for both companies was Peter Gerard Parkes.

An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) identified the failure of all defendants to manage the risks from asbestos within the premises. This included the failure to ensure the suitable and sufficient assessment of the risks to the health of employees working there was carried out. The defendants were aware that asbestos was present within the premises and had previously prepared asbestos management plans however these were not reviewed or updated. The location and condition of the asbestos on site was not actively monitored and the risk of any exposure to asbestos containing materials was not adequately considered or controlled by the defendants.

Kespar Engineering Ltd of Kidderminster, pleaded guilty to breaching Regulations 4 (10), 6 (1) and 11 (1) of the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012. The company was fined £51,000 and ordered to pay costs of £30,000.

SDF Automotive Limited (in administration) formerly of Kidderminster, pleaded guilty to breaching Regulations 4 (10), 6 (1) and 11 (1) of the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012. The company was conditionally discharged for two years.

Peter Gerard Parkes of Bridgnorth, pleaded guilty to several counts under Section 37 of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974. These related to his individual failing as a Director of Kespar Engineering Ltd, SDF Automotive Ltd, and Smethwick Drop Forge Ltd in respect of the offences committed by the Companies under his control. Mr Parkes was given a 12-month suspended prison sentence, fined £9,000 and ordered to pay costs of £14,000. The case was heard at Kidderminster Magistrates’ Court.

asbestos risk — Asbestos risks must be managed and controlled (stock image)

Speaking after the hearing, HSE inspector Sarah Reilly, said:

“It is important that all dutyholders including company directors recognise the importance of actively managing asbestos containing materials in non-domestic premises and ensure that the potential risk to health posed by the materials is controlled. Health and safety law places duties on organisations and employers – directors can be personally liable and held to account when these duties are breached.”

Asbestos still kills around 5,000 workers each year, this is more than the number of people killed on the road – around 20 trades people die each week as a result of past exposure. However, asbestos is not just a problem of the past. It can be present today in any building built or refurbished before the year 2000.

When materials that contain asbestos are disturbed or damaged, fibres are released into the air. When these fibres are inhaled, they can cause serious diseases. These diseases will not affect people immediately; they often take a long time to develop, but once diagnosed, it is often too late to do anything. This is why it is important that employers and anyone in control of a building have duties to protect employees and others from asbestos risks.

Before undertaking any work in a building that may contain asbestos (e.g. built or refurbished before the year 2000), you need to do the following:

Identify whether asbestos is present and determine its type and condition

People responsible for maintenance of non-domestic premises, have a ‘duty to manage’ the asbestos in them, and should provide contractors and others with information on where any asbestos is in the building and what condition it is in.
If no information is available or it is limited and its is suspect asbestos may be present then you should have the area surveyed and representative samples of the material you are going to work on analysed.
Alternatively, you can assume that any material you need to disturb does contain asbestos and take the appropriate precautions for the highest risk situation.

Carry out an asbestos risk assessment

Decide if it is possible to carry out the building or maintenance work avoiding the risk of asbestos exposure all together.
If that’s not possible, identify who might be at risk and the level of possible asbestos exposure from any work.
On this basis, decide what work methods are necessary to provide effective control of the risks.

Decide if the work needs to be carried out by a licensed contractor

Most asbestos removal work will require a contractor holding a licence from HSE.
All work with sprayed asbestos coatings and asbestos lagging and most work with asbestos insulation and asbestos insulating board (AIB) requires a licence.
Identify if your work needs a licensed contractor.
Find a licensed contractor or find out how to apply for a licence.

If the work is not licensable, decide if the work needs to be notified

If it does not need a licence, you can do maintenance work on or around ACMs with the appropriate controls in place.
Some non-licensed work also has additional requirements, i.e. notification of work, medical surveillance and record keeping – this work is known as notifiable non-licensed work (NNLW).

Ensure those carrying out the work are suitably trained.

Any worker who is liable to disturb asbestos during their day-to-day work needs to receive appropriate training to enable them to protect themselves and others.

If you require advice on health and safety in your workplace, please contact one of the Ashbrooke team.

4 August 20221 July 2024

Prosecution after worker loses part of hand

The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) has undertaken a prosecution after a worker loses part of hand. Laxtons Limited, a West Yorkshire manufacturing company, has been fined for safety breaches after a worker lost part of their hand in a textile machine.

On 24 March 2021, an employee of Laxtons was running a number of textile machines. When he opened a guard to check on a build-up of fibres, he reached in to remove material, losing part of his hand.

HSE investigation

An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found that one of the machines had a defective interlock device. This allowed the machine to continue running when the guard, which was located over a pair of in-running rollers and gears, was opened.

Laxtons Ltd of Shipley, West Yorkshire pleaded guilty to breaching Regulation 11 (1) of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998. The company was fined £15,750 and ordered to pay £759 in costs at Leeds Magistrates’ Court.

worker loses part of hand — Work equipment must be safe to use (stock image)

HSE inspector Julian Franklin said:

“Machine guarding should be in line with the appropriate standard, and regularly checked. This incident could so easily have been avoided by simply training staff in the safe and correct way of operating machinery, and regularly checking that safety devices are functioning.”

Work equipment

The Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998, often abbreviated to PUWER, place duties on people and companies who own, operate or have control over work equipment. PUWER also places responsibilities on businesses and organisations whose employees use work equipment, whether owned by them or not. PUWER requires that equipment provided for use at work is:

suitable for the intended use
safe for use, maintained in a safe condition and inspected to ensure it is correctly installed and does not subsequently deteriorate
used only by people who have received adequate information, instruction and training
accompanied by suitable health and safety measures, such as protective devices and controls. These will normally include guarding, emergency stop devices, adequate means of isolation from sources of energy, clearly visible markings and warning devices
used in accordance with specific requirements, for mobile work equipment and power presses

Some work equipment is subject to other health and safety legislation in addition to PUWER. For example, lifting equipment must also meet the requirements of the Lifting Operations and Lifting Equipment Regulations 1998 (LOLER), pressure equipment must meet the Pressure Systems Safety Regulations 2000 and personal protective equipment must meet the Personal Protective Equipment at Work Regulations 1992 (PPE).

If your business or organisation uses work equipment or is involved in providing work equipment for others to use (e.g. for hire), you must manage the risks from that equipment. This means you must:

ensure the equipment is constructed or adapted to be suitable for the purpose it is used or provided for
take account of the working conditions and health and safety risks in the workplace when selecting work equipment
ensure work equipment is only used for suitable purposes
ensure work equipment is maintained in an efficient state, in efficient working order and in good repair
where a machine has a maintenance log, keep this up to date
where the safety of work equipment depends on the manner of installation, it must be inspected after installation and before being put into use
where work equipment is exposed to deteriorating conditions liable to result in dangerous situations, it must be inspected to ensure faults are detected in good time so the risk to health and safety is managed
ensure that all people using, supervising or managing the use of work equipment are provided with adequate, clear health and safety information. This will include, where necessary, written instructions on its use and suitable equipment markings and warnings
ensure that all people who use, supervise or manage the use of work equipment have received adequate training, which should include the correct use of the equipment, the risks that may arise from its use and the precautions to take
where the use of work equipment is likely to involve a specific risk to health and safety (eg woodworking machinery), ensure that the use of the equipment is restricted to those people trained and appointed to use it
take effective measures to prevent access to dangerous parts of machinery. This will normally be by fixed guarding but where routine access is needed, interlocked guards (sometimes with guard locking) may be needed to stop the movement of dangerous parts before a person can reach the danger zone. Where this is not possible, such as with the blade of a circular saw, it must be protected as far as possible and a safe system of work used. These protective measures should follow the hierarchy laid down in PUWER regulation 11(2) and the PUWER Approved Code of Practice and guidance or, for woodworking machinery, the Safe use of woodworking machinery: Approved Code of Practice and guidance
take measures to prevent or control the risks to people from parts and substances falling or being ejected from work equipment, or the rupture or disintegration of work equipment
ensure that the risks from very hot or cold temperatures from the work equipment or the material being processed or used are managed to prevent injury
ensure that work equipment is provided with appropriately identified controls for starting, stopping and controlling it, and that these control systems are safe
where appropriate, provide suitable means of isolating work equipment from all power sources (including electric, hydraulic, pneumatic and gravitational energy)
ensure work equipment is stabilised by clamping or otherwise to avoid injury
take appropriate measures to ensure maintenance operations on work equipment can be carried out safely while the equipment is shut down, without exposing people undertaking maintenance operations to risks to their health and safety

When providing new work equipment for use at work, you must ensure it conforms with the essential requirements of any relevant product supply law (for new machinery this means the Supply of Machinery (Safety) Regulations 2008). You must check it:

has appropriate conformity marking and is labelled with the manufacturer’s details
comes with a Declaration of Conformity
is provided with instructions in English
is free from obvious defects – and that it remains so during its working life

If you require advice on health and safety in your workplace, please contact one of the Ashbrooke team.

3 August 20221 July 2024

Roofer jailed following fall injuries

Roofer jailed for four months after a worker was seriously injured falling through a fragile roof on to a concrete floor.

The man and another labourer, who were working for Geoff Whitehouse, trading as Midland Roofing, were working on a fragile roof on 11 August 2021 to remove old skylights at premises in Henley Road, Warwick.

The injured worker fell approximately three metres through the roof and suffered serious multiple fractures including a fractured skull.

HSE investigation

An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found that the majority of the work could have been done from underneath the roof. The inside of the roof could have been fitted with nets prior to anyone going on to the fragile surface so that someone falling would have been saved by the nets. The work at height was not adequately planned, managed nor supervised.

Additionally, Mr Whitehouse did not have employers’ liability insurance in place. Employers’ liability insurance ensures employers to have at least the minimum level of insurance to cover against claims brought by employees that are injured at work or become ill as a result of work.

Geoff Whitehouse, trading as Midland Roofing, of Worcester pleaded guilty to breaches under Section 1(1) of the Employers Liability (Compulsory Insurance) Act 1969 and Regulation 4(1) of the Work at Height Regulations 2005 (as amended) at Coventry Magistrates’ Court. He was sentenced to four months in prison at Redditch Magistrates’ Court.

roofer jailed — Working at height requires careful planning (stock image)

Speaking after the hearing, HSE inspector Michael Griffiths, said:

“Fragile roofs can and do kill. It does not matter how careful you are standing, sitting or walking on a fragile roof, the roof can collapse as it did in this case, causing potentially life-changing injuries. This case also highlights the need for ELCI insurance in this sort of work where self-employed labourers under the control of a sole trader are ‘employees’ under Health and Safety Law.”

Employers’ liability insurance

Most employers are required by the law to insure against liability for injury or disease to their employees arising out of their employment. The Employers’ Liability (Compulsory Insurance) Act 1969 requires employers to have at least a minimum level of insurance against any such claims. Employers’ liability insurance will cover relevant work injuries or illness whether these are caused on or off site. However, any injuries or illness relating to motor accidents which occur while employees are at work may be covered separately by the employer’s motor insurance.

Public liability insurance is different. It covers employers for claims made against them by members of the public or other businesses, but not for claims by employees. While public liability insurance is generally voluntary, employers’ liability insurance is compulsory. Employers can be fined if they do not hold a current employers’ liability insurance policy which complies with the law. Employers must display a copy of this certificate where employees have reasonable access to it. If they do not, they can be fined. Since 1 October 2008, employers have been allowed to satisfy this requirement by displaying the certificate electronically for example on the company’s intranet or website. If your employer chooses this method, they must ensure that you know how and where to find the certificate and you have reasonable access to it.

Falls from height are the most common cause of workplace fatalities accounting for 29 deaths in 2021/22. An operation at height requires careful planning and the use of suitable equipment. A risk assessment should be undertaken as part of the planning and detail the controls required to ensure workers’ safety including any fall arrest systems to be used. Any worker involved in an activity at height must be competent to carry out the task and be proficient in using the equipment provided.

If you require advice on health and safety in your workplace, please contact one of the Ashbrooke team.

2 August 20221 July 2024

Agency downgrading pollution prosecutions

The Guardian has reported that England’s Environment Agency has downgraded 93% of pollution prosecutions for serious incidents over four years, despite recommendations from frontline staff for the perpetrators to face the highest sanction according to a leaked report seen by the paper’s reporters.

The EA receives over 100,000 incident reports a year, every one of which is recorded and assessed. Of 495 serious pollution investigations which were recommended for prosecution only 35 cases were taken forward to prosecution. A spokesperson for the Environment Agency said the regulator does not comment on leaked documents. However, they said it does:

“consider, record and prioritise all incidents – with all breaches and offences reported to us undergoing a robust initial assessment. We have a wide range of enforcement options, including civil sanctions, enforcement undertakings, and in some circumstances, advice and guidance. Where prosecution is appropriate, we pursue robustly and in accordance with the Code for Crown Prosecutors, which sets out that the evidence must provide a realistic prospect of securing a conviction and that a prosecution is in the public interest. Over 90% of our prosecutions are successful, and recent outcomes such as the £90m fine of Southern Water Services show a clear and welcome trend towards much bigger fines against offenders in appropriate cases.”

If you require environmental advice, please contact one of the Ashbrooke team.

2 August 20221 July 2024

Building contractor sentenced over unsafe work

Building contractor sentenced after unsafe work methods constituted a public risk and resulted in asbestos being disturbed.

Preston Crown Court heard that in November 2020, Mr Mohammed Shafiq, owner of a roller shutter business, purchased a former warehouse in Manner Sutton Street, Blackburn to convert into smaller work units, including one for his own use – Mr Shafiq was using his own employees for this.

A report was received by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) from a member of the public, concerned about the fact that bricks from the blocked-up windows were being knocked out from inside onto the street below, causing risk to passers-by.

The HSE investigation found that as well as the risk posed to pedestrians, no edge protection had been installed to prevent the employees from falling. They were also at risk of an internal fall down an open shaft. Additionally, an asbestos survey had not been carried out on the building prior to work commencing.

Building contractor sentenced over unsafe work — Refurbishment projects may require an asbestos survey (stock image)

As a result, piles of disturbed asbestos containing materials (ACMs) such as asbestos cement and insulation, were lying throughout the site. Workers were dry sweeping construction dust and debris possibly containing carcinogenic asbestos dusts without any respiratory protective equipment or suitable personal protective equipment. None of the workers had been provided with any training in asbestos awareness.

Live electric cables were being trailed through water without RCD protection, posing a risk of electric shock, and there was a general lack of training and suitable equipment for work to be carried out in a safe manner. An experienced principal contractor should have been hired to assess risks and undertake refurbishment work in a controlled manner.

The building contractor sentenced over unsafe work was Mohammed Shafiq of Blackburn who pleaded guilty to breaching Regulation 5 of the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012, Regulation 4 of the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2015 and Regulation 4 of the Work at Height Regulations 2005. He received a 12-month suspended sentence and was fined £5,000 and ordered to pay costs of £4,636.08

HSE inspector Christine McGlynn said after the hearing:

“The public can be reassured that HSE takes concerns seriously and will not hesitate to investigate thoroughly and prosecute those who put workers and members of the public at risk.’’

Construction projects require detailed planning to ensure that they are carried out safely. The appointment of a principal contractor to plan and coordinate the construction project will help to ensure activities are done safely. Workers engaged in construction activities should be competent and have a good understanding of safe working practices. Where construction involves disturbing the fabric of a building, an assessment is required in respect of asbestos. Asbestos containing materials may be present in any building which was constructed or refurbished before 2000 and it may be necessary to engage a specialist asbestos contractor to undertake an intrusive survey.

If you require advice on health and safety in your workplace, please contact one of the Ashbrooke team.

1 August 20221 July 2024

Prosecutions for angling offences

The Environment Agency has prosecuted two men for angling offences. Wayne Knight of Cosby, Leicester, was fined £220, ordered to pay costs of £135 plus a victim’s surcharge of £34. Knight admitted fishing without a licence at Mill on the Soar, Sutton Elms, on 1 February 2022.

Lester McManus of Leicester, was fined £40, ordered to pay costs of £135 plus a victim’s surcharge of £34. McManus admitted fishing for freshwater fish during the close season at Aylestone on the River Soar on 24 March 2022.

A spokesperson for the Environment Agency said:

“These cases show we pursue offenders through the courts and won’t hesitate to take enforcement action where anglers break rules.”

Anyone found fishing illegally may face prosecution and a fine of up to £2,500.

Any angler aged 13 or over, fishing on a river, canal or still water needs a licence. The money raised through the sales of rod licences is re-invested back into the sport and illegal fishing undermines the Environment Agency’s efforts to make fishing sustainable.

A 1-day licence costs from just £6 and an annual licence costs from just £30 (concessions available). Junior licences are free for 13 – 16-year-olds.

Licences are available online or by calling the Environment Agency on 0344 800 5386 between 8am and 6pm, Monday to Friday. The Environment Agency carries out enforcement work all year round and is supported by partners including the police and the Angling Trust. Fisheries enforcement work is intelligence-led, targeting known hot-spots and where illegal fishing is reported.

If you require advice on environmental issues, please contact one of the Ashbrooke team.

1 August 20221 July 2024

Working at height leads to prosecution

A steel fabrication company has been fined £8,000 after employees working at height fell two metres from the forks of a telehandler.

The workers of Eagle Structural Ltd were dismantling an unwanted shipping container at Great Carlton, Lincolnshire on 7 October 2019.

Operatives were working in an unsecured non-integrated working platform when it fell from the forks of a telehandler. One employee suffered a broken arm and fractured elbow and has been told that he will never regain a full range of movement in his arm. The second employee suffered internal bruising.

An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found that the non-integrated working platform was not compatible with the telehandler and that it had not been properly secured to prevent it falling.

Working at height requires careful planning (stock image)

Eagle Structural Ltd of Lincolnshire pleaded guilty to breaching Regulation 8(b)(i) of The Work at Height Regulations 2005. At Lincoln Magistrates’ Court on 1 July 2022, the company was fined £8,000 and ordered to pay costs of £2,497.

Speaking after the hearing, HSE inspector, Tim Nicholson said:

“This incident could so easily have been avoided by simply carrying out correct control measures and safe working practices. Companies should be aware that HSE will not hesitate to take appropriate enforcement action against those that fall below the required standards.”

Working at height requires careful planning and the use of suitable equipment. A risk assessment should be undertaken as part of the planning and detail the controls required to ensure workers’ safety. Any worker involved in an activity at height must be competent to carry out the task and be proficient in using the equipment provided.

If you require advice on health and safety in your workplace, please contact one of the Ashbrooke team.

28 July 20221 July 2024

Fire Safety Guidance in Construction

Every year many construction site workers are killed or injured because of their work, and many others suffer serious ill health. The hazards are not, however, restricted to people working on sites. Children and other members of the public are also killed or injured because construction activities have not been adequately controlled. The construction industry’s performance has steadily improved, but the rates of death, serious injury and ill health are still among the highest of all industries. Fire safety is a key risk that construction operations need to manage and control.

The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) has updated its guidance on fire safety in construction HSG168. The third edition of the guidance was published this month and explains how everyone involved in construction projects can comply with their legal duties relating to fire risks. It is aimed at all those who procure, design, develop and manage construction sites, including clients and designers – it is relevant to all construction projects.

The main changes to this guidance relate to elimination, and or, reduction of fire risks at the pre-construction stage as required by the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2015. The HSE has also added a glossary.

Each year there are estimated to be hundreds of fires on construction sites, potentially putting the lives of workers and members of the public at risk. Fire safety in construction is about eliminating fire risks during the design phase (where practicable), preventing fires from starting and ensuring people’s safety if they do.

This guidance does not reference the findings of the Grenfell Tower fire in 2017 because the fire did not occur while the building was being renovated or constructed.

The HSG168 guide is available free of charge on the HSE website. If you require advice for your construction project, please contact one of the Ashbrooke team.

26 July 20221 July 2024

Leading Health and Safety at Work

Company directors and Boards have a duty to provide leadership within their organisations for health and safety management. The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) has published a guide for directors which provides advice on the effective leadership of health and safety.

indg417-Directors