1012BRN.pdf (578.72 kb)

Ed- Christmas time is always a difficult time is you have to associate the traditional family revelries with some tragic event.  With the a large number of cases relating to fatalities this month I feel personally for all affected by the bereavement who inevitably will have spent time in December recalling the horrors and what befell their loved one.

From the court's perspective sentencing hearings can be concentrated in the week or so before the Christmas break as inevitably courts don't want to have trials adjourned over the Christmas break if they can avoid it.  This is also the reason why, to a lesser extent sentencing hearings typically take place on Fridays as courts would rather not have a jury trial conducted held over a weekend.

 

HSE Prosecutions

Worker engulfed in flames died after crushing aerosol canisters

Defendants: (1) Deeside Metal Company Limited; (2) Jeyes UK Limited

Court: Caernarfon Crown Court

Offences: (1) Deeside Metal Company - breach s2(1) HSWA, reg 3(1) MHSWR 1999

Fine: £100,000; Costs £10,000

(2) Jeyes UK Limited - breach s3(1) HSWA

Fine £330,000; £50,000 costs

The HSE prosecuted Deeside Metal Company Ltd, of Saltney, Chester, and Jeyes UK Ltd, of Bromfield Industrial Estate, Mold, for failing to have proper controls in place to manage the extremely flammable materials that led to 37 year-old, Mark Wright's fatal burn injuries on 12 April 2005. A separate health and safety charge was also brought by the Crown Prosecution Service against the manager of Deeside Metal Company Ltd, Mr Robert Roberts.

The court heard how Mr Wright's employer, Deeside Metal Co, had received the canisters from Jeyes UK who had failed to clearly label and segregate them from less hazardous waste.  This meant that employees handling the canisters assumed they were empty when in fact they contained substances which should have been labelled "extremely flammable" and treated as such.  Te manager of Deeside Metal Co, Robert Roberts, instructed Mr Wright to crush the canisters in a metal baler. When the baler was activated, a canister caught fire, engulfing Mr Wright in flames.  He suffered 90% burns and subsequently died.

Neither company had carried out suitable risk assessments before allowing workers to handle potentially hazardous materials such as aerosols, and both had failed to train or monitor staff in their disposal.

HSE Head of Operations in Wales, Jane Lassey said:

"Both companies contributed to the death of Mr Wright by allowing this highly dangerous situation to arise. Jeyes UK had a clear responsibility to ensure the canisters were labelled correctly and separated fromnon-hazardous waste, and to have procedures to prevent such dangerous waste being inadvertently removed from their site. By failing to do this, they put workers in danger.  Deeside Metal Co lacked proper procedures for handling hazardous materials and operating dangerous machinery. They assumed the canisters were empty, but this proved to be a fatal error of judgement."

Robert Roberts pleaded guilty to a charge under Section 7(a) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 and was fined £10,000.

Ed - as a reminder:

Section 2(1) of The Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 states: "It shall be the duty of every employer to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, the health, safety and welfare at work of all his employees."

Section 3(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 states: "It shall be the duty of every employer to conduct his undertaking in such a way as to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, that persons not in his employment who may be affected thereby are not thereby exposed to risks to their health or safety."

Section 7(a) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 states: "It shall be the duty of every employee while at work to take reasonable care for the health and safety of himself and of other persons who may be affected by his acts or omissions at work"

Section 3(1) of the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 state that: " Every employer shall make a suitable and sufficient assessment of-

• a. the risks to the health and safety of his employees to which they are exposed whilst they are at work; and
• b. the risks to the health and safety of persons not in his employment arising out of or in connection with the conduct by him of his undertaking."

 

BT sentenced following fatal ladder fall

Defendant: BT Telecommunications plc

Court: Southwark Crown Court

Offence: Breach s2(1) HSWA

Fine: £300,000; £196,150 costs

BT has been fined £300,000 following the death of a worker who fell from a ladder while carrying out installation works.

Power construction engineer David Askew, 52, from Braintree, Essex, suffered fatal head injuries after falling from a wooden ladder at London's Canonbury Telephone Exchange on 27 October 2006.

The Crown Court heard Mr Askew was installing distribution boards and running cabling as part of his work and would have been working at a height of more than 4m. He fell from a nine-step wooden ladder, sustaining a serious head injury and died 18 days later.

The HSE investigation found a number of issues including a failure to ensure the work at height was properly planned, and that Mr Askew was provided with suitable access equipment for work at height.  Two wooden ladders found at the scene had not been subject to an annual inspection, contrary to BT's own health and safety policy.

BT were found guilty of breaching section 2(1) HSWA.

Nicola Maisuria, HSE inspector, said:

"The fact that this incident was entirely avoidable makes Mr Askew's death all the more tragic.  The dangers posed by work at height are well known, yet BT failed to create the conditions to ensure this task was carried out safely and the appropriate access equipment was used.  Employers have a responsibility to ensure that work at height is properly planned and organised."

 

Schlumberger Oilfield UK PLC fined for radiation exposure risk

Defendant: Schlumberger Oilfield UK PLC

Court: Aberdeen Sheriff Court

Offence: Breach s3(1) HSWA

Fine: £300,000

Schlumberger Oilfield UK PLC has been was fined a £300,000 (reduced from £450,000 given their guilty plea) for a breach of their health and safety duty to others which placed workers from other companies operating on a North Sea installation at risk of exposure to radiation.

The breach took place on a rig approximately 210 miles east of Dundee in April 2008. Schlumberger had been contracted to undertake wireline logging operations as part of the Maersk drilling programme for the Cawdor well.

The process involved the lowering into the well of a logging tool, which was fitted with a radioactive source. The purpose of that was for the source to obtain data from the well which was then transmitted to the rig for analysis.

During the preparations for the lowering of the logging tool, the radioactive source was not successfully loaded. It then lay on the drill floor for approximately four hours before being found, during which time 14 workers were placed at risk of radiation exposure.

The case was investigated by the HSE and reported to the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service Health and Safety Division. Following the case, Elaine Taylor, Head of the COPFS Health and Safety Division, said:

"This wholly avoidable incident could have had devastating consequences for the workers involved in the operation.

Workers who were in close proximity to the source were placed in danger as a result of failings on a range of issues including risk assessment, the system of work, training and instruction."

Following the case, HSE Inspector Gillian Rodaks said:

"Loss of control of any radioactive source is extremely serious, particularly of the size involved in this incident, and it was only by good fortune that the source was recovered in a relatively short period of time. Had someone held it, even just for a few minutes, they would have received a significant radiation dose which may have resulted in injuries to their hands and increased their risk of developing cancer in later life.  The incident was entirely foreseeable and preventable. The possibility of a worker failing to correctly load a radioactive source from a mobile container into a logging tool had not been identified in the company's risk assessment; adequate control measures were therefore not in place to control this risk.

 Confirmation checks on the location of radioactive sources after movement and relocation should be fundamental elements of any safe system of work: radioactive source location should never be assumed but rather confirmed by the use of a radiation monitoring instrument. Too many incidents of this nature occur when users fail to carry out this simple task."

 

Worker's death at hydroelectric plant

Defendant: Hochtief Construction AG

Court: Inverness Sheriff Court

Offence: Breach s3(1) HSWA

Fine: £266,000

Hochtief Construction AG was fined £266,000 (reduced from £400,000 due to their plea of guilty) following the death of Ondrej Hladik, a construction site worker employed by a company contracted to work on a Hochtief project.

On 22 September 2008, Mr Hladik was driving a telehandler on the site of the Glendoe hydro project near Fort Augustus, where Hochtief Construction AG was building a new dam and turbine station.    

The telehandler which Mr Hladik was driving was in extremely poor condition. The most significant of many defects found on examination of the telehandler following Mr Hladik's death was that a large window which, had it been in place would have prevented any part of the handler's body from being exposed to risk of being struck by the boom as it lowered under hydraulic power ,was missing completely.

It is believed that the boom lowered onto and crushed Mr Hladik when he was leaning through the missing window. The incident could not have occurred had the protective window been in place.

 Following the conviction, Elaine Taylor, Head of the Health and Safety Division, said:

 "By providing for use by workers on the site a piece of equipment that was in such poor condition, Hochtief Construction AG exposed them to a significant risk to their health and safety, Sadly, for Mr Hladik and his family, that risk materialised in the loss of his life.  Hochtief did not have in place a system to ensure that its plant was adequately inspected and maintained and this resulted in a vehicle being used on site when it was in an appalling condition   Mr Hladik's death was entirely avoidable had Hochtief complied with health and safety legislation. "

Following the case, HSE Inspector John Shelton said:

 "The telehandler involved in the incident was the most poorly maintained construction vehicle of its type I have ever seen in over 30 years service as an HSE Inspector. It should never have been allowed near any construction site." 

 

Scottish power fined after electricity cable death

Defendant Scottish Power UK plc

Court: Shrewsbury Crown Court

Offence: breach reg4(2) Electricity at Work Regulations 1989 ("As may be necessary to prevent danger, all systems shall be maintained so as to prevent, so far as is reasonably practicable, such danger.")

Fine: £130,000; Costs £48,000

 The HSE prosecuted Scottish Power UK plc after 20-year-old Simon Lines, from Prees, was killed in Shropshire on 2 January 2007. Mr Lines was killed after he went out on to Whitchurch Road in Prees to warn motorists that a power cable had sagged because of high winds. The cable was then struck by a passing van and fell on to the road where a car drove over it, causing it to fly up into the air. The cable hit Mr Lines in the face, seriously injuring him.

He was taken to hospital but died eight days later from the injuries caused by being struck by the cable, rather than by electric shock.

An HSE investigation into the incident showed the cable had been attached to a wooden block on the side of nearby Holly Farm House. John Steed, an HSE specialist electrical inspector, said the block was found to be partially rotten and the deterioration led to the cable becoming detached. Since the incident Scottish Power has removed this type of fixing arrangement from its network.

Inspector Mr Steed said:

"Mr Lines was trying to make sure others weren't injured and in doing so, received injuries so severe they killed him. Those who knew him may take small comfort from the fact that he died while acting in such an honourable way, but the fact that it could have been prevented makes the death of such a young man even more tragic.  The failure to maintain the wooden block led to the cable anchors detaching from the building, and set in motion a chain of events with a tragic outcome. Whilst some of the links in that chain of events could not have been prevented, what could have been prevented was the securing of the cable to the building by Scottish Power in what turned out to be an inadequate way.  The fact they have now replaced wooden blocks with more effective metal brackets means the chances of something like this happening again will be reduced. But overhead power lines can be dangerous and need to be treated with caution, especially if they appear to be damaged."

 

Worker paralysed after being crushed by reel of paper

Defendant: SCA Hygiene Products Limited

Court: Mold Crown Court

Offence: breach s2(1) HSWA

Fine: £120,000; Costs £18,514

An employee of a SCA Hygiene Products Limited has been left paralysed from the chest down after being crushed by a two tonne reel of paper.  Christopher John Shaw, from Wirral, was working as an assistant winder for the company when the incident occurred on 29 July 2007.

Mr Shaw (38) was involved in producing and preparing paper reels at the firm's site in Oakenholt, Flint. He was using his body weight to slow down a moving paper reel when he slipped. The reel, which was around two metres in diameter, then rolled onto him causing serious crush injuries which left him with paralysis.

HSE inspector Will Gretton said:

"Employees using their body weight to slow down such large and potentially dangerous items as paper reels, clearly isn't a safe way of working.  There were clear risks that weren't properly managed by the company, which resulted in Mr Shaw's horrific injuries.  The consequences of this incident could have been even more serious. The company has now put into place more effective measures to protect the health and safety of their employees, unfortunately too late for Mr Shaw."

 

Training failures led to patient death

Defendant: Health and Care Services (UK) Limited

Court: Leeds Crown Court

Offence: breach s3(1) HSWA

Fine £80,000; Costs £40,823

A care home operator has been fined £80,000 for serious training failures following the death of a patient as a result of "inappropriate and dangerous" restraint techniques.

Forty-two year-old Anthony Pinder, who had learning and behavioural issues, was physically restrained for around 90 minutes by staff at the Old Vicarage nursing home in Stallingborough, near Grimsby, on 1 October 2004. He was eventually released and crawled unaided to his room, but was found dead a short time later.

Leeds Crown Court heard that Health and Care Services (UK) Limited, part of the Craegmoor group, failed to ensure staff were adequately trained to carry out the safe physical restraint of residents.

The measures used to control Mr Pinder were described as "poor, inappropriate and dangerous" during the case, although those engaged in the restraint were not blamed because the court heard they were simply doing what they felt was necessary under difficult circumstances. The failure to train staff in safe restraint techniques rested with management.

The Commission for Social Care Inspectorate highlighted an urgent need for safe restraint training just five months prior to Mr Pinder's death, which prompted a written promise from senior management at Health and Care Services that improvements would be made.

However, the investigation found that no such training was given. The company therefore failed to comply with a regulatory requirement, and failed to take all reasonably practicable steps to protect patients at the Old Vicarage - a breach of section 3(1) of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974.

Following the conclusion of the case HSE Inspector Brian Fotheringham said:

"Anthony Pinder was a vulnerable person whose death was entirely avoidable. Health and Care Services (UK) Ltd position themselves as a market leading specialist care provider through Craegmoor, and Anthony and his family had a right to expect that he would be properly cared for. But they were badly let down.  Senior management knew that staff at the Old Vicarage often had to physically intervene and restrain residents, but they failed to ensure that staff were trained in appropriate and safe restraint techniques.

"This failure is inexcusable given that this lack of training had been drawn to the attention of the company following an inspection of the home by the Commission for Social Care Inspection five months before Anthony's death. Despite the fact that the Commission produced a report requiring this training to be provided, it was not delivered.  It is shameful that even after Anthony's death the company did not train the staff. This was only done after I forced the issue by serving an enforcement notice shortly after commencing my investigation."

He added:

"The company says that steps have been taken to prevent a repeat of this incident. I hope Anthony's tragic and untimely death and the subsequent prosecution, sends an important message to all care sector companies."

 

Unsafe roofwork led to fatal fall

Defendants: (1) Open Contracts Ltd; (2) Malcolm Dunn

Court: Southwark Crown Court

Offences: Open Contracts Ltd breaching (1) reg 4(1), (2) reg 5, and (3) reg 9(2)(a) Work at Height Regulations 2005

Fine: £60,000; Costs £29,757

Offences: Malcolm Dunn breaching (1) reg 5, (2) reg 6(3) and (3) reg 9(2)(a) of the Work at Height Regulations 2005

Fine: £2,000; Costs no order made

 

Surrey-based Open Contracts Ltd, and Cardiff-based sub-contractor Malcolm Dunn, have  been prosecuted following the death of a worker.

On 7 July 2007, Paul Morrissey, 57, of Penarth, Cardiff, fell to his death while working to replace old rooflights in an industrial unit.

Mr Morrissey had been on the roof of Unit 37 Fairview Industrial Estate, Hayes, cutting the bolts which were securing an old rooflight, intending to replace it with a new one. It is not known what caused him to fall nearly 7m through the rooflight onto the concrete floor below.

However, the removal of the fixings securing the rooflight meant that only slight pressure would have made it give way beneath him. There was no one else on the roof at the time and critically, there was nothing to break his fall. He died at the scene.

The investigation by HSE found that the contractor appointed to carry out the work had little knowledge or experience of this type of roofwork. There was also evidence that there was a basic failure to plan the work adequately.

HSE Inspector, Giles Meredith, said:

"The dangers of working on fragile roofs are well known and yet this senseless waste of life continues. This incident was all too familiar. It is vital that anybody planning or carrying out roofwork of this nature has the right experience and manages the risks involved. Whoever is responsible for selecting contractors needs to ensure that the people they get in know what they are doing.  In this case, the provision of safety nets would have kept Paul Morrissey alive."

Ed - Notes to editors

Regulation 4 of the Work at Height Regulations 2005 states: "Every employer shall ensure that work at height is carried out in a manner which is so far as is reasonably practicable safe."

Regulation 6(3) of the Work at Height Regulations 2005 states: "Where work is carried out at height, every employer shall take suitable and sufficient measures to prevent, so far as is reasonably practicable, any person falling a distance liable to cause personal injury."

Regulation 9(2) of the Work at Height Regulations 2005 states: "Where it is not reasonably practicable to carry out work safely and under appropriate ergonomic conditions without passing across or near, or working on, from or near, a fragile surface, every employer shall - (a) ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, that suitable and sufficient platforms, coverings, guard rails or similar means of support or protection are provided and used so that any foreseeable loading is supported by such supports or borne by such protection; (b) where a risk of a person at work falling remains despite the measures taken under the preceding provisions of this regulation, take suitable and sufficient measures to minimise the distances and consequences of his fall.

 

Polish worker dies in ladder fall

Defendant: Bergwerff Numansdrop BV

Court: Ipswich Crown Court

Offences: (1) breach s3(1) HSWA; (2) breach reg 4 Work at Height Regulations 2005

Fine £60,000; costs £21,709

Dutch fumigation company Bergwerff Numansdrop BV, operating in Suffolk, has been fined £60,000 with £21,709 costs after a 42 year-old worker fell to his death from a ladder.

Robert Schmelter, a self-employed electrician from Poland, was asked to install two fumigation chambers at Anchorage Storage Ltd's premises in Kenton, Suffolk on behalf of the defendant in October 2007. He was coming down a ladder when he slipped and fell, hitting his head hard on the floor, the ladder coming down on him. He was taken to hospital where he died of his injuries.

An investigation by the HSE found that the company had failed to properly plan and appropriately supervise Mr Schmelter's work at height to ensure that it was carried out in a safe manner.

HSE Inspector Nicola Surrey said:

"This sad death of a man should never have happened. Bergwerff Numansdrop BV did not carry out their legal duty to ensure the health and safety of their employees.  In this case, it was down to Bergwerff Numansdrop BV to make sure the work at height was planned, organised and carried out by competent persons and that the right work equipment and collective measures were selected to prevent falls."

 

Glossop manufacturer fined over worker's death

Defendant: Glossop Carton and Print Ltd

Court: Birmingham Crown Court

Offences: (1) breach s2(1) HSWA; (2) breach s3(1) HSWA

Fine: £50,000; Costs £76,150

A Glossop packaging manufacturer has been fined after a worker was killed when a machine he was working on was activated while he was still inside.

Maintenance worker Clive Hall, 50, suffered fatal head injuries at Glossop Carton and Print Ltd's factory on Platt Street in Padfield on 8 September 2006.

The court heard Mr Hall was carrying out maintenance work to the inside of a 'cut and crease' machine, used to manufacture packaging, when it was switched on by the operator.  Mr Hall was struck on the head by bars that transfer cardboard through the machine and was killed instantly. He had been working at the company for less than two months.

After sentencing, Eddy Tarn, the investigating HSE inspector, said:

"Mr Hall tragically died because simple measures were not taken by Glossop Carton and Print to prevent the machine being switched on while he was inside.  The maintenance of machinery often involves people working in dangerous situations not encountered during normal production work. People will continue to die in horrific circumstances if employers don't plan, control and monitor maintenance work to machinery.  Both machine operators and maintenance workers should be given adequate training. If a simple procedure for cutting the power supply to the machine had been followed then Mr Hall's death could have been avoided."

Ed - Since 2004, HSE inspectors have visited more than 1,300 companies nationwide as part of a project to improve safety for workers who carry out maintenance work inside dangerous machines. HSE also helped promote safe machinery maintenance during the European Health and Safety at Work Week in October 2010.

 

Pharmaceutical workers exposed to hazardous substance

Defendant: Catalent UK Swindon Zydis Limited

Court: Swindon Magistrates Court

Offences: (1) breach s2(1) HSWA; (2) breach reg 6(3) COSHH; (3) reg 7(1) COSHH; (3) reg 11(1) COSHH; reg 11(3) COSHH

Fine: £50,000; Costs £50,123.10

A Swindon pharmaceutical company has been fined after a number of its employees were sensitised to a potent substance and developed allergic contact dermatitis.

The HSE prosecuted Catalent U.K. Swindon Zydis Limited after ten employees  developed the skin condition when working with Olanzapine. The substance is an active ingredient in one of the most commonly prescribed antipsychotic drugs and is a known cause of allergic contact dermatitis.

Whilst Olanzapine had been identified by the company as the potential cause of previous cases of dermatitis, it failed to carry out an immediate review of its risk assessment as required by law.  Instead, a thorough review was only started in February 2008 after two cases of allergic contact dermatitis had been confirmed on 19 October 2007 and 3 December 2007 and HSE had visited the company.

The court heard how during HSE's investigation, a further eight employees were confirmed to have allergic contact dermatitis as a result of being in contact with Olanzapine.

HSE inspector, Joanna Knight, said:

"Catalent UK Swindon Zydis failed to address the inadequacies not only in its systems for working with hazardous substances, but also in its systems for health surveillance and keeping health records. This led to a number of employees being exposed to the substance and subsequently developing allergic contact dermatitis.  This is an uncomfortable and irreversible condition, which can cause the skin to crack and bleed, and could have been completely avoided had Catalent taken the time to review its risk assessment."

Ed - Regulation 6(3) of the Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations 2002 states that: 'The risk assessment shall be reviewed regularly and forthwith if-

• a. there is reason to suspect that the risk assessment is no longer valid;
• b. there has been a significant change in the work to which the risk assessment relates; or
• c. the results of any monitoring carried out in accordance with regulation 10 show it to be necessary.'

Regulation 7(1) of the Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations 2002 states that: 'Every employer shall ensure that the exposure of his employees to substances hazardous to health is either prevented or, where this is not reasonably practicable, adequately controlled.'

Regulation 11(1) of the Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations 2002 states that: 'Where it is appropriate for the protection of the health of his employees who are, or are liable to be, exposed to a substance hazardous to health, the employer shall ensure that such employees are under suitable health surveillance.'

Regulation 11(3) of the Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations 2002 states that: 'The employer shall ensure that a health record, containing particulars approved by the Executive, in respect of each of his employees to whom paragraph (1) applies, is made and maintained and that that record or a copy thereof is kept available in a suitable form for at least 40 years from the date of the last entry made in it.

 

Worker's arm crushed between two tonne metal plates

Defendant: Forth Steel Limited

Court: Edinburgh Sheriff's Court

Offence: breach s2(1) HSWA

Fine: £50,000

On 21 August 2009, Ian Sutherland was working with a colleague to mark a delivery of sheet metal plates with unique identifying numbers before they could be accepted into the factory.  The metal plates, each weighing more than two tonnes, were placed on top of each other. This meant that they each had to be lifted in turn so that the next plate down could be marked.

At the time of the incident, it was the company's practice for a crane operator to lift the plates by approximately 18 inches using bare hooks. A wooden baton would then be placed in between the plates, the intended purpose of which was to protect the operators while reaching in to mark the lower plate.

Only a month before the incident occurred, HSE had carried out an inspection of the site. At that time, the HSE inspector had highlighted the importance of using the proper lifting equipment and the need for employees to have the correct training and supervision.

Mr Sutherland placed his right arm between the two plates to mark the lower plate, when the upper plate slipped from the hook it was held by and fell onto his arm.

Mr Sutherland's right forearm was broken and needed surgery to insert a six inch steel plate to support it. His middle finger on his right hand was also broken and needed to be pinned in three places. More than a year after the incident, Mr Sutherland still has a constant dull ache in his arm and has limited strength, and is unable to grip items properly.

An investigation by the HSE showed that Forth Steel Ltd had an unsafe procedure in place for lifting the steel plates. The investigation also showed that the company had not carried out a suitable assessment of the risks involved when employees worked under a suspended load and that the crane operator had not received any formal lifting training, despite the company identifying this need some months earlier.

Following the case, HSE inspector Kerry Cringan said:

"This was a serious and entirely preventable incident that has left Mr Sutherland with lasting pain and discomfort, and affected his quality of life.  Forth Steel Ltd was using a wholly inappropriate system of work, and despite previous discussions about lifting activities, used inappropriate equipment when the propriety plate grabs were available."

 

Company fined after man crushed to death by truck

Defendant: Trevett Engineering Limited

Court: Milton Keynes Crown Court

Offence: breach s2(1) HSWA

Fine: £30,000; Costs £11,630

Bryn Evans, 52, from Milton Keynes was acting as a banksman at Trevett Engineering Limited and was guiding a reversing heavy goods delivery vehicle towards a doorway when he was killed.  As Mr Evans was guiding the lorry into the loading area he became trapped between the back of the vehicle and the building's brick wall. He died at the scene from crush injuries to his chest.

Milton Keynes Crown heard Mr Evans had not received training as a banksman. An investigation by the HSE showed there was no specific need for a banksman during the reversing process, it had merely become customary at the site.

HSE Inspector, Karl Howes said:

"This tragic case illustrates the risks that are associated with deliveries and reversing vehicles.  It is vital that employers fully assess the risks involved in deliveries to site. Banksman should only be used when there are no safer available methods to control reversing and then only when people have been fully trained to undertake that role."

Ed - the starting point when determining a fine for a company for a work related death is £100,000.  Even allowing for a discount for a prompt plea of guilt of say 30% the size of this fine seems surprisingly low.

Bury firm sentenced after woman's fingers severed

Defendant: Chadwicks of Bury Ltd

Court: Manchester Crown Court (Minshull Street)

Offence: breach reg 11(1) PUWER 1998  "Every employer shall ensure that measures are taken...which are effective to prevent access to any dangerous part of machinery or to any rotating stock-bar; or to stop the movement of any dangerous part of machinery or rotating stock-bar before any part of a person enters a danger zone"

Fine: £22,500; Costs £8,708

Chadwicks of Bury Ltd, which produces lids for yogurt pots, ice cream cartons and other food containers, was prosecuted by the HSE when one of their workers had four fingers severed in a lid-punching maching on 15 May 2008.

The worker was rethreading silver paper through the machine when the cutting tool restarted, severing four fingers on her right hand.

The HSE investigation found the company had covered the sensors on the machine so it could be used to cut paper instead of foil lids. The sensors would have stopped the machine operating when paper was being rethreaded through the cutting tool, if they had not been disabled.

Chadwicks of Bury pleaded guilty to breaching Regulation 11(1) PUWER by failing to prevent access to dangerous parts of machinery.

Nanette Cox, the investigating inspector at HSE, said:

"This lady suffered life-long injuries in a completely avoidable incident. She has been unable to return to work, and finds it difficult to carry out everyday activities.  Chadwicks of Bury disabled the sensors on the machine and failed to install an alternative guard to stop employees accessing the dangerous cutting tool inside the machine while it was operating."

 

Sawmill fined after worker's leg injured

Defendant: Windymains Timber Ltd

Court: Haddington Sheriff's Court

Offence: breach s2(1) HSWA

Fine: £20,000

On 4 April 2008, Grzegorz Krzaczek was working with two colleagues at Windymains Timber Ltd to process wooden logs into planks, using a machine called a drop sorter. At the time of the incident, it was common for the drop sorter to jam two or three times a day.

When two planks became stuck in the machine, Mr Krzaczek climbed onto its conveyor belt, kicked the wood that was causing the jam, and unblocked it. However, because the power had not been turned off, as soon as he dislodged the wood, it re-started immediately at full speed.

Mr Krzaczek's leg was dragged into the machine, where it became trapped. The machine stopped running seconds later. It is not clear whether the machine stopped after becoming blocked by another piece of wood, or because a colleague isolated the power.

Mr Krzaczek remained trapped in the machine for approximately one and half hours and had to be freed by firefighters. His left leg was broken in three places and he suffered significant nerve damage.

An investigation by the HSE found Windymains Timber Ltd had failed to assess the risks involved when employees operated the drop sorter and to have a safe procedure in place for clearing blockages. The investigation also showed that dangerous parts of the machine could be accessed by workers, because there was inadequate guarding in place.

HSE inspector David Stephen said:

"This horrific incident caused severe injuries and could very easily have led to the death of Mr Krzaczek.  It was entirely preventable and simple precautions would have protected workers from the moving parts of the machinery. Had Windymains Timber carried out an effective risk assessment, it would have recognised the guarding in place at the time was simply not good enough."

 

Care home operator fined after investigation into fatal fall from window

Defendant: Heritage Manor Limited

Court: Worcester Magistrates Court

Offences: breach s3(1) HSWA; reg 3(1) MHSWR

Fine: £16,500; Costs £25,000

Thora Monk died after falling more than 4m from her bedroom window at The Lawns Nursing Home in Kempsey on 5 January 2007. The home is operated by Heritage Manor Ltd, which manages retirement and nursing homes across the UK.

During the prosecution the court heard that the window in the frail woman's bedroom could be opened fully.

Police attending the incident at the time found that other windows could also be opened fully and were accessible to elderly residents. Published HSE guidance recommends that windows, through which there is a risk of a person falling if opened, should be restricted so they open no more than 100mm.

The court heard that Heritage Manor Ltd had failed to maintain its method of restricting the opening of the windows adequately, thus putting residents at risk.

HSE investigating inspector Claire Coleman said:

"The risk of vulnerable people falling from windows is a well known issue in nursing homes. Adequate controls are easy to implement and maintain, and advice is available from HSE. For example, the fitting of chain restrictors that physically prevent windows from opening further than 100mm is a straightforward and inexpensive method of protecting people who are dependent upon others for their safety.  Care providers are urged to revisit their risk assessment to ensure that they have adequate measures in place and that these are being suitably maintained."

 

 

Surrey businessman ignored health and safety warnings

Defendant: Mark Mason

Court: Guildford Crown Court

Offences: breaches s2(1), s 21 & s22 HSWA (breaching Prohibition and Improvement Notices)

Penalty: 240 hours Community Service

A Surrey-based businessman who ignored prohibition and improvement notices to stop dangerous work has been sentenced at Guildford Crown Court..

Inspectors from the HSE visited Peter Mason Skip Hire at North Moors, Slyfield Industrial Estate in Guildford on 4 June 2009, where they found skips and general waste stored in a way that put workers at risk from falling objects.

An Improvement Notice was issued ordering a reduction in the number of skips and waste materials stored on site. However, inspectors returned on nearly two months later (27 July 2009) and discovered Mr Mason had ignored the original order.

The HSE then issued a Prohibition Notice ordering operation of the site to cease immediately, including the handling and emptying of skips and also preventing access to a workshop until the materials on the site could be stored appropriately.

HSE Inspector Kari Sprostranova, said:

"Mark Mason put not only himself in danger, but his employees and other people in the area. He was extremely lucky that no one was injured as a result of the unsafe practices being used.  Mr Mason was given ample time to correct the problem, but blatantly disregarded the Improvement Notice. HSE will hold employers to account if they do not comply with these notices."

 

Firm fined after roofer breaks back

Defendant: James Thompson

Court: London Central Criminal Court (Old Bailey)

Offence: Regulation 6 (3) Work at Height Regulations 2005

Fine: £10,000; Costs £7,000

A roofing contractor from East London broke his back when falling through the skylight of a building extension, after safety procedures were overloooked.  The worker fell whilst removing a tarpaulin from the one-storey roof extension at a flat in Collamore Avenue, South West London on 18 December 2006.

The court heard James Thompson, who traded as James Thompson Carpentry and Building, was supervising the work on site.  However, the HSE investigation found Mr Thompson could have undertaken a number of measures to have prevented the incident, but failed.

The tarpaulin had been put in place to provide the ground floor of the flat with weather protection. The worker was removing this when the tarpaulin snagged. The man stepped on some insulating board that had been laid across the skylight, which gave way under his weight. He fell over three metres to the concrete floor below.

The injured worker suffered a broken back as a result of the fall and can now only walk short distances and needs to use a walking stick.  His condition will not improve, and the former judo fighter and rugby player will not be able to return to work in the construction industry again.

 

Demolition firm fined after teenager blinded in one eye

Defendant: Dovestone Contractors Ltd

Court: Trafford Magistrates Court

Offence: breach reg 4(1) PUWER - "Every employer shall ensure that suitable personal protective equipment is provided to his employees who may be exposed to a risk to their health or safety while at work except where and to the extent that such risk has been adequately controlled by other means which are equally or more effective."

Fine: £8,000; Costs £4,000

Dovestone Contractors Limited has been fined after a teenager was blinded in one eye whilst helping to demolish a mill in Tameside.  The 19-year-old was using a pickaxe to lever up wooden floorboards at Hyde Mill, on Ashton Road in Hyde on 8 September 2009, when he was hit in his left eye by a splinter.

The company was prosecuted after it failed to ensure the teenager wore goggles or other eye protection.

Trafford Magistrates' Court heard that the teenager had been working for the company for one and a half years before the incident. He had been helping to remove wooden planks from four floors at the mill, ahead of its demolition.

Neil Martin, the investigating inspector at HSE, said:

"A young man has suffered a life-long, irreversible injury because he wasn't given safety goggles that would have cost less than £5. He hasn't returned to work in the demolition industry because he's frightened of losing the sight in his other eye.  He may also have difficulty trying to get a drivers' licence. This was a life-changing injury.  Dovestone Contractors should have known there was a serious risk of its workers being blinded by splinters if they didn't wear eye protection while using pickaxes to lift floorboards. This is required by law and there is simply no excuse for such a basic health and safety error."

 

Maintenance firm fined after Heathrow incident

Defendant: Messier Services Limited

Court: City of London Magistrates Court

Offence: breach s2(1) HSWA

Fine £7,200; Costs £11,820

A worker suffered injuries to his face and knees when he fell 2m in a maintenance hangar at Heathrow Airport.  John Nicholas, 59, from Gloucester, was employed by aircraft maintenance company Messier Services Ltd, and was replacing the landing gear at the front of an A340 aircraft when the incident happened.

An HSE investigation found Mr Nicholas and a colleague were using a fork lift truck in an attempt to align the barrel of the main landing gear fitting with the socket on the underside of the aircraft.

During the operation Mr Nicholas realised the alignment was not correct and in an attempt to correct it kneeled down on an unsecured pallet designed to support the landing gear, two metres above the floor.

However, the forklift truck supporting the pallet reversed suddenly causing the pallet to drop to the floor. Mr Nicholas fell with the pallet, fracturing his knee cap and suffering significant injuries to the left side of his face. Since the incident he has needed a number of operations to his mouth and teeth.

The HSE investigation found the work was not properly planned and the pallet being used did not have a proper adjustment to help align the landing gear and the socket on the underside of the aircraft.

Following sentencing HSE inspector Steve Kirton said:

"This company did not properly plan this work even though it was a core part of its operations.  Mr Nicholas has suffered severe injuries to his face and knees purely due to a lack of planning.  Messier should have either found a way working at ground level or provided a safe way of working at height with access to the right equipment.  Employers need to plan work and assess the risk to people not only in their own premises, but also when the work takes place in another company's property."

 

Excavator firm fined after worker's fingers severed

Defendant: Komatsu UK Ltd

Court: Consett Magistrates Court

Offence: breach s2(1) HSWA

Fine £6,000; Costs £3,421

John Watson, 55, from Wheatley Hill, County Durham, was drilling holes in steel plates at Komatsu UK Ltd Birtley, when his right hand became caught in the rotating parts of the machine.  Two of his fingers were severed.

Mr Watson needed surgery to completely amputate his third finger and the middle finger between the first and second knuckle. He also had a bone removed from his hand. Mr Watson has worked at Komatsu for nearly twenty years but has been unable to return to work since.

The court heard that the HSE investigation showed that using the drill was not part of Mr Watson's normal work but at the time of the incident he had been asked to make some storage racking for the factory.  The investigation found that at the time of the incident on 23 June 2009 there was no guard on the drill to prevent access to the rotating parts and it was not the first time the drill had been used without a guard.

The gloves that Mr Watson was wearing became entangled and drew his hand into the rotating parts. He had not received training in the use of the drill and the precautions needed to reduce the risk of entanglement.

After the case, HSE Inspector Zoe Feather, said:

"This was an entirely preventable incident that has left Mr Watson with permanent injuries. The risks from drilling machines are well known. If a suitable guard had been fitted to the machine Mr Watson could not have become entangled.  Also, the wearing of gloves greatly increased the risk of entanglement and was likely to have contributed to the severity of Mr Watson's injuries. The increased risk from the wearing of gloves at drilling machines is well documented.  It is vital employers give their workers the necessary information, instruction and training in order that they understand the risks in using drilling machines and how to operate them safely."

 

Workers' lives put in danger at Manchester karaoke bar

Defendants: (1) Music Box Karaoke Ltd, (2) Marc Royle

Court: Trafford Magistrates Court

Offences: (1) Music Box Karaoke Ltd breaches of regs 14(1), 16(a) and 21(1) of the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007;

(2) Marc Royle breaches of regs 38(a), 39(1) and 41(1) Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007

Fine: (1) £6,000; Costs (1) £3,313; Fine: (2) £450; Costs (2) £2,710

An investigation by the HSE at the site of the K2 nightclub on George Street in Manchester City centre found large quantities of cardboard and other packaging discarded throughout the site.

Music Box Karaoke Ltd, and site manager Marc Royle appeared at Trafford Magistrates' Court to admit breaching three health and safety regulations each.

When HSE inspectors visited the K2 site on 28 January 2009, they found potentially flammable materials piled high to the ceiling in the basement, escape routes were not marked and in some cases were blocked entirely.  The court heard the HSE inspectors were shocked at the scene that confronted them and, had a fire been ignited at the site, the risk to life would have been extremely serious.

The building's fire alarm had been switched off and the fire extinguishers found on site had not been tested for seven years.  The HSE immediately issued two prohibition notices closing the site down until significant improvements were made.  It took a total of 14 large skips and several people more than two days, working through the night, to clear the waste materials.

Neil Martin, the investigating inspector at HSE, said:

"We were called in after receiving a complaint about the safety standards on site and were shocked by what we found. The basement and corridors were blocked with waste materials so it would have been extremely difficult to escape in a fire.  There was a Chinese restaurant open to the public on the first floor and the neighbouring buildings were also occupied. Just one spark could have set light to any of the piles of cardboard, and then dozens of lives would have been put in danger.  Music Box Karaoke and Marc Royle both seemed to be ignorant of the health and safety laws that applied to them."

Ed - this is a master class on the CDM regs!

Regulation 14(1) of the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007 states: "Where a project is notifiable, the client shall appoint a person ("the CDM co-ordinator") to perform the duties specified...as soon as is practicable after initial design work or other preparation for construction work has begun."

Regulation 16(a) states: "Where the project is notifiable, the client shall ensure that the construction phase does not start unless...the principal contractor has prepared a construction phase plan."

Regulation 21(1) states: "The CDM co-ordinator shall as soon as is practicable after his appointment ensure that notice is given to the Executive containing such of the particulars specified in Schedule 1 as are available."

Regulation 38(a) states: "Suitable and sufficient steps shall be taken to prevent, so far as is reasonably practicable, the risk of injury to any person during the carrying out of construction work arising from fire or explosion."

Regulation 39(1) states: "Where necessary in the interests of the health and safety of any person on a construction site, there shall be prepared and, where necessary, implemented suitable and sufficient arrangements for dealing with any foreseeable emergency, which arrangements shall include procedures for any necessary evacuation of the site or any part thereof."

Regulation 41(1) states: "Where necessary in the interests of the health and safety of any person at work on a construction site there shall be provided suitable and sufficient fire-fighting equipment, and fire detection and alarm systems, which shall be suitably located."

 

East Lothian Council fined after sculpture falls onto boy's foot

Defendant: East Lothian Council

Court: Haddinton Sheriff's Court

Offence: breach s3(1) HSWA

Fine £6,000

East Lothian Council has been fined after a young boy was injured when a sculpture near a children's play area fell onto his foot.  The boy, who was aged five at the time, was playing football with his brother and friends on 30 January 2009 on Lammermuir Crescent, Haddington. At the time, the Nungate Wheel sculpture was sited close to the children's play park on Lammermuir Crescent. The Council had installed the sculpture at this site in June 2000.

While he was playing nearby, the 81kg sculpture fell from its upright position on to the boy's right foot, causing multiple fractures. He was admitted to hospital overnight and his foot placed in plaster.

An investigation by the HSE discovered that there was no person or department within the Council that had overall responsibility for the inspection and maintenance of sculptures in the area. A specialist metallurgical report carried out as part of the investigation revealed that the sculpture was considerably weakened due to a fatigue fracture that had developed over a number of years and which was consistent with people swinging or rocking it.

Following the case, HSE inspector Lindsey Stein said:

"Had East Lothian Council carried out a simple risk assessment, they would have easily identified it was possible that children would climb and play on the Nungate Wheel, given that it was positioned only a few metres away from the play area.  The injuries this young boy suffered were entirely preventable. If the council had appropriate systems in place to ensure structures installed on their property were done so to a suitable standard, and introduced regular inspections to check their stability, the damage to the Nungate Wheel would have been identified in time to repair it."

 

Other cases in brief

Defendant	Offences	Penalty	Decription
Universal Mouldings	S2(1) HSWA, reg 11 PUWER	Fine £5,000; Costs £7,500	Hand injury caused by circular saw - told to reach beneath guard
Ridgeons Limited	Regulation 4(3) of the Electricity at Work Regulations 1989	Fine £5,000; Costs £4,344.70	5m fall following electric shock - unmarked unisolated 415v conductor
(1) Aston University (2) Access Fire and Security Ltd	(1) Reg 5(1) MHSWR 1999 and Reg 4(9)(c) of the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2006 (2) Regulation 5(a) of the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2006	(1) Fine £4,000; Costs £2,000 (2) Fine £1,000; Costs £1,000	Exposure of 2 workers to asbestos following failure to manage installation of CCTV camera where asbestos containing materials were present
Tower Bakery Limited	S2(1) HSWA	Fine £4,000	Fingers crushed failure to plan cleaning operation, failure to isolate machine
Andy Sutton Fencing Limited	S22 HSWA - failure to comply Improvement Notice	Fine £3,000; Costs £2,369	Failure to provide hot running water for staff, failure to protect workers from wood dust and dangerous machinery
Mohammed Aslam t/a 'The Raj'	Section 1(1) of the Employers' Liability (Compulsory Insurance) Act 1969	Fine £3,500; Costs £2,585.40	Failure to have Employers' Liability Insurance and failure to produce certificate
Tony MacTaggart	Regulation 3(3) of the Gas Safety (Installation & Use) Regulations 1998	Fine £2,500; Costs £902	Undertaking gas work without being registered with GasSafe
Business Forms Express	Reg 5(1), reg 8(1) PUWER 1999, reg 3(1) MHSWR 1999.	Fine £1,500, Comp £500, Costs £2,626	Trapped between reversing trailer and levelling flap on loading platform

 

Environment Agency prosecutions

Fined for taking too much water

Defendant: Lafarge Aggregates Limited:

Court: Norwich Magistrates Court

Offence: s24 Water Resources Act 1991 - breaching condition on abstraction licence

Fine: £14,000; Costs £2,069

The defendant took up to 900% more water than it was licensed to take from the River Yare to wash gravel on some dates between January and November 2009.

Miss Claire Bentley, prosecuting for the Environment Agency, said the company had previously been warned for taking too much water in 2006. It also has six other previous cautions for environmental offices, two for breaches of abstraction licences.

On this occasion there was over-abstraction on many dates between January and November 2009 and although meter readings were recorded, no calculations were made to determine cubic metres taken.

Miss Bentley told the court that the offences came to light on a routine audit of the company's records. They showed that on one day alone 1,800 cubic metres of water over the daily limit was taken, 900% extra.

Mr Ian Mundy, a manager for the company, told investigators that the failure was not common practice. He thought that the problems arose because of a high turnover of staff, a variety of different staff recording meter readings and a quarry manager running two sites.

He said the company deeply regretted the incident and since then had introduced a new and better recording system.

In mitigation Mr Lukas Rootman, solicitor for Lafarge, said the company had taken action to prevent a future incident occurring include investing in new technology so that abstraction pumps had automatic cut-outs, the adoption of a new spreadsheet system that automatically recognised any exceedances and carrying out audits at all the sites looking at abstraction.

After the hearing Environment Agency officer Emma Roberts said: "The limits on abstraction licences are calculated to protect the environment. By exceeding these limits on several occasions, Lafarge put the environment at risk.

"We expect companies to take their environmental responsibilities seriously and will take action where we find breaches of legislation. We do believe that Lafarge has learnt from this, and look forward to working with them to look at their procedures to ensure this cannot happen again".

Ed - Lafarge Aggregates pleaded guilty to:

Between 12 January 2009 and 14 November 2009 at Easton Quarry, Dereham Road, Easton, Norwich, Norfolk you did contravene condition 6 of the Licence to Abstract Water granted to you on the 3 July 2008, in that you exceeded on various days during that period the maximum daily quantity of water to be abstracted.

Contrary to section 24(1) and 24(4)(a) Water Resources Act 1991

 

Farming contractor fined for polluting streams with effluent and slurry

Defendant: Michael Tucker

Court: Exeter Magistrates Court

Offence: s85 Water Resources Act 1991

Fine: £8,000; Costs £2,000

Agricultural contractor Michael Tucker has been ordered to pay £10,000 in fines and costs after two Devon streams were polluted during waste spreading operations on local farms.

In March 2009 an Environment Agency officer was called to Pirzwell Farm, Kentisbeare to investigate a report of discolouration of the River Ken at Stowford Water. As he approached the farm the officer saw dirty water escaping from a field gateway and into a roadside drain.

A tractor driver was working in a nearby field. The driver, who was employed by Michael Tucker, said he had been spreading trade waste via an umbilical spreading system. The waste, that mainly comes from food production, is used as a fertiliser and soil improver. It should only be applied to appropriate fields and in suitable weather conditions.

The driver had become aware of a leak in an umbilical pipe. After speaking with the Agency officers, he stopped the flow of effluent and returned to dig interceptor ditches down the side of the field to prevent any more dirty water reaching the gateway and nearby stream.

Effluent discharging from the field was analysed and found to contain high levels of ammonia. It also had a high Biochemical Oxygen Demand. This can result in a major drop in levels of dissolved oxygen and cause the death of fish and other aquatic life.

Downstream of Pirzwell Farm the River Ken was polluted with a light brown liquid flowing from a surface water culvert. Upstream of the farm, the river was clear. Approximately 60 metres of the river was affected by the pollution.

In a separate incident Michael Tucker had been spreading slurry on a sloping field at Edgeworthy Farm, Nomansland, Tiverton. The following day the Environment Agency responded to a complaint from a member of the public and found that slurry had been washed off the field into the watercourse by heavy rain.

The pollution was traced to the farm where Tucker had been working the previous day. The slurry entered a tributary of the River Dalch, a major tributary of the River Taw that forms part of a catchment important for fisheries and recreation.

'The spreading of slurry should be done with great care. It requires careful planning and awareness of soil and weather conditions. The defendant took a gamble and spread slurry knowing full well there was a high risk of rain. This left no time for the slurry to be absorbed into the ground and it was washed off into a stream causing pollution,' said Matt O'Brien for the Environment Agency.

 

Sussex brewery found guilty of polluting watercourse

Defendant: The Darkstar Brewery Company Limited

Court: Mid Sussex Magistrates Court

Offence: breach s85 Water Resources Act 1991

Fine: £3,000; Costs £2,365

The Darkstar Brewery Co has pleaded guilty to polluting a tributary of the River Adur and a nearby pond.

The court heard how the Environment Agency received a report of a discoloured stream in Burgess Hill, Sussex in May 2009.  Environment Agency officers attended the stream where they followed its course which led to Lye Pond.

Further investigations led the officers upstream to Moonhill Farm where a lagoon was found to be grey with a bad odour. Liquid was traced back to another lagoon which was also grey and smelt. The officers dye tested the water and confirmed the connection between the lagoon and the effluent found in the stream.

The officers then spoke to the company director, Paul Read, who confirmed that the effluent was wash water coming from his brewery.  The court heard how the Darkstar brewery had an arrangement with a local farmer to discharge their effluent into the lagoon - where it could be emptied for disposal.  When Mr Read was shown what was happening he said that the farmer must have forgotten to empty the lagoon so it was overtopping.  When Mr Reed was shown the pond and the watercourse both upstream and downstream of the pond he agreed that the stream was being affected by the discharge.

During a later interview under caution in August 2009, Mr Read verified that all the brewery's drains (surface water, roof water and process water) all discharged into the lagoon for emptying by the farmer.

As a result of the brewery's drains discharging into the lagoon over a period of at least a few months, a vast array of wildlife had been wiped-out including may fly, caddis fly and freshwater shrimp. Taking their place was an abundance of rat-tailed maggot which can live and prosper in polluted environments.

The stream had therefore been converted into one which supported a good range of pollution sensitive invertebrates to one that is dominated by a species specially adapted to survive conditions of no oxygen.  An Environment Agency investigation further revealed that the discharge had, at least, impacted over 1km of the stream

Andrew Barnes of the Environment Agency said: "In this day and age all those responsible for handling polluting or potentially polluting matter are expected to take care to ensure that there is no risk to the environment.

"Prosecution is usually a last resort but Darkstar Brewery had not taken on board a previous warning from the Environment Agency. As a result of the brewery's negligence, the local environment has suffered. I hope that this case serves as a reminder to others about their environmental responsibilities".

Darkstar said they expressed regret and that it was not deliberate incident as they had a contract with the farmer.  They also regretted that they did not liaise with the farmer more and they freely co-operated with the Environment Agency.
 
The court said this was a continuing breach and they had failed to respond so animal health was affected.  The Magistrates took into consideration the company's mitigation but said their arrangements with the farmer should have been more rigorous.
 
The watercourse which is the subject of this incident is an unnamed tributary of the River Adur.  It passes through agricultural land located between Ansty and Haywards Heath for about 600 metres, eventually entering the Lye pond which is a fishery belonging to a local fishing club.  The pond then discharges into a further stream which heads off to the Adur.

 

Health and Safety Executive Policy Announcements

 

Consultation opens in January on RIDDOR changes

The HSE has agreed a plan for the publication of consultation documents on proposed changes to the Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations 1995 (RIDDOR).

In his report on health and safety, Lord Young recommended that RIDDOR be amended 'by extending to seven days the period before an injury or accident needs to be reported'. In line with commitments made in the Government's formal response to the report - HSE will open a three month consultation in January 2011.

Under current rules when an employee is absent from work for more than three days following an incident or injury at work, employers are required to report the incident to the relevant enforcing authority - either HSE or the local council.

The proposed amendment increases this 'over three day' period to over seven consecutive days.  This change would align the incident reporting threshold with that for obtaining a 'fit note' from a GP for sickness absence, and would ensure that someone who has suffered a reportable injury has had a professional medical assessment.

Judith Hackitt, HSE Chair said;

"The Board discussed the proposals at length, and asked for some additional work to be done prior to the launch of the consultation in January.  Whilst there will be some obvious advantages in reducing the reporting requirements on business, there will be other factors which need to be taken into account. We hope that interested parties will use the consultation exercise to provide the range of perspectives we need to consider in order for us to advise the Government appropriately."

The consultation paper will be published on www.hse.gov.uk^[1] week commencing 17 January 2011. The deadline for responses will be 11 April 2011.  HSE will then consider the responses, and expects to be in a position to submit recommendations to the Secretary of State by the end of May.

Ed - I'm not surprised the HSE appears to be lukewarm about this proposal.  Many investigations are sparked off by RIDDOR notifications.  A shift to a 7 day absence will almost certainly reduce these notifications and may well lead to poor practice going undetected.

 

Webtool for shops takes worry out of risk assessment

A quick and easy online tool to help retailers assess the hazards in their shop has been made available as a trial from 15 December.

The HSE has worked to produce the web tool to help implement Lord Young's recommendation that low-risk workplaces, such as shops, are spared unnecessary paperwork and bureaucracy.

The aim of the tool is to take the mystery out of risk assessments, giving retailers the means to be confident that they have identified the key risks in their premises and how to minimise them. The whole process can be completed quickly and easily.

Local Authority inspectors who carry out inspections will take account of the assessments as evidence that shops have taken the appropriate action.

The Health and Safety Executive, wants to ensure that it is a helpful, easy-to-use tool and will be seeking views and feedback until March 2011.

Judith Hackitt, Chair of HSE, said:

"Shop managers are best placed to identify what happens in their premises and we want to enable them to have confidence to say that they have dealt with the risks that do exist. One of the real plus points is that the tool helps to clear away those things that retailers really don't need to waste time worrying about. It will save time and effort and help to focus their efforts on any real issues which need to be addressed, including identifying areas where higher risk activities do take place.  The new 20-minute risk assessments make it clear that the assessment of low-risk shops can be done quickly and easily. There really is no need for long detailed documents covering very minor and highly improbable risks."

The online tools prompt users to answer a series of straightforward questions that generates their risk assessment and action plan. HSE recently launched a similar 20-minute risk assessment tool for offices and one specifically for use in classrooms is out to consultation. Simplified risk assessments for other low risk workplaces currently being developed.

The new online risk assessment for shops is not intended to replace specific risk assessments for higher risk activities such as the sale or storage of chemicals or fireworks, or outlets where there are machinery operations.

The online risk assessment tool can be found on HSE's website at http://www.hse.gov.uk/consult/condocs/risk-assessment/shop.htm

 Ed - I very much welcome this new found helpful approach from the HSE.  Just imagine if they had been this helpful when the 'six pack' was first introduced and many of us were wrestling with the whole concept of risk assessment.  And then we had the 'noughties' when the HSE were studiously unhelpful and revelled in their role as a 'punchy regulator'.  All this goes to prove  just how cyclical regulation is in this country.

 

1011BRN.pdf (568.09 kb)

 

HSE Prosecutions

Worker killed by swinging crane hook

A Cardiff-based recycling company has ordered to pay over £230,000 after an employee died following an incident at its premises.

John Penhalagan, 44, was employed by Celsa Manufacturing (UK) when he was struck by a crane hook weighing 3.7 tonnes used to convey ladles of molten steel in the firm's new 'melt' shop on 30 May 2007.  Mr Penhalagan of Bridgend suffered fatal head injuries and died later at the University Hospital of Wales, Cardiff.

An HSE investigation found that while there was no mechanical defect with the crane, the hooks were able to move at head height near to operators on the ground without adequate safeguards.  This led to HSE prosecuting Celsa Manufacturing (UK) of Castle Works, East Moors Road, Cardiff. The company pleaded guilty to breaching s 2(1) HSWAat Cardiff Crown Court. It was fined £200,000 and ordered to pay costs of £36,294.38.

After sentencing, HSE inspector Stephen Jones said:

"This was a horrific incident - an extremely heavy, moving piece of equipment was able to strike Mr Penghalagan directly in the head because Celsa Manufacturing didn't have safe systems of work in place.  The operation had recently moved to a new melt shop but while there was no mechanical defect with the crane, the company did not address the fact that the hooks were able to move at head height near to operators on the ground.  The system of work did not enable crane operators at the site to clearly see employees working on the ground, putting them at serious risk of being struck by moving objects.  Celsa should have put in place a thorough risk assessment and most importantly acted upon that assessment, given the generally hazardous nature of this type of operation - but sadly the plans in place were just not adequate and led to this man's terrible death."

Calcarb fined

At Airdrie Sheriff Court, Mersen Scotland Holytown Limited, formerly known as Calcarb Limited was fined £160,000 for a breach of Health and Safety legislation which resulted in serious injury to a worker.  The fine would have been £240,000 were it not for their guilty plea.

The incident took place on 14 August 2008, at the premises of the accused at Eurocentral in Holytown. Thomas Robinson, 27, was removing a bag from the dust filtration system when his left hand was caught in the rotary valve, severing all four fingers and his thumb.

Although surgeons were able to reattach three of his fingers, they will never regain their full function, and it was not possible to reattach Mr Robinson's thumb or ring finger. As a result of this incident, he is permanently impaired and disfigured.

The case was investigated by the HSE  and reported to the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS) Health and Safety Division.

Following the case, Elaine Taylor, Head of the COPFS Health and Safety Division, said:

"Failures to properly respect health and safety can have a devastating impact on an individual's life. Everyone has the right to go to work and expect that their employer will do everything that is reasonable to ensure that their work place is safe. Those employers who fail to meet their obligations can expect to be prosecuted.  Working alongside the HSE, our specialist prosecutors use their experience and expertise to meet the challenges of complex and serious cases.  This incident has had a profound impact on Mr Robinson, and has left him with injuries and impairment with which he will have to cope for the rest of his life."

Lafarge Cement fined after worker set on fire

Lafarge Cement UK plc - an international cement company - has been prosecuted by the HSE after a worker was set alight in an explosion.  Electrical engineer, Paul Ridings, 39, of South Benfleet, Essex had been contracted to work for Lafarge Cement UK Plc, when he was engulfed by the fireball at the firm's site at Thurrock Marine Terminal, Grays, Essex.

Basildon Crown Court heard that on 10 October 2008, Mr Ridings was investigating a fault with an energy meter when he inadvertently disturbed a loose connection and exposed a strand of wire leading to an electrical explosion.

Mr Ridings' clothes caught fire and he sustained burns to his face, neck, chest, arms and hands. He received emergency treatment and spent 19 days in the Specialist Burns Unit at Broomfield Hospital. Since the incident he has undergone numerous skin grafts and operations to remove scar tissue.

An investigation by the HSE found that Lafarge failed to ensure electrical systems were maintained in such a way as to protect workers.

The company admitted breaching ss 2(1) and 3(1) HSWA. It was fined £130,000 and ordered to pay costs of £29,742.

HSE inspector, David King, said:

"Every year approximately 20 people die from electrical shocks or burns following incidents at work. Mr Ridings could easily have been killed in this incident.  It's clear that in this case the overall arrangements for maintaining electrical assets were inadequate and the health and safety of both staff and contractors were put at risk."

Road-works company fined over M4 death

A Newport traffic management company has been sentenced after an employee was struck and killed by a vehicle when working on the M4 near Cardiff.

Sean Luke Hale, 30, from Cwmbran, was hit by a car whilst crossing the carriageway to collect traffic cones from the central reservation during road resurfacing of the busy motorway in 2006.

An HSE investigation found Mr Hale's employers, R P Traffic Management Ltd, failed to ensure that a safe system of work was in place that included the use of appropriate signs to warn drivers that workmen were on the carriageway at the time.

Cardiff Magistrates Court heard Mr Hale was working with a colleague at around 9.30pm on 8 September 2006 when the incident happened.

As trainees, both men were being supervised at the time but the quality of supervision was called into question. The court heard both men were observed crossing the carriageway in a dangerous manner on a number of occasions on the same night.

R P Traffic Management Ltd, of Factory Road, Newport pleaded guilty to failing to ensure the safety of two trainee traffic management operatives under s2(1). It was fined £100,000 and ordered to pay £22,000 costs.

The firm install and remove signage, cones and other materials to manage the flow and speed of traffic when construction works and other activities take place on roads.

HSE inspector Wayne Williams said:

"On the night in question, the gang of three workers consisted of one foreman and two trainees. This was not adequate supervision in what is a high risk working environment. Trainee road-workers should always be under a high level of supervision when undertaking this kind of work as part of an overall safe system of work on the job.  Everyone involved in work on high speed roads should learn from this tragedy and consider whether they are doing enough to prevent needless deaths and injuries. Motorway works can be very dangerous places unless a high degree of control is maintained.  Advanced warning signs should always be used when people are working on motorway road-works to alert drivers that people may be in the road and exercise caution as they approach."

Southern Gas Networks fined

A gas transportation company - Southern Gas Networks plc- has been fined £20,000 after a car flipped on its side when it hit a metal plate during road works.

During road works on Foreland Road, Bembridge, Isle of Wight on 2 April 2008, workers lifted a large metal road plate using an excavator ready to be moved later.  A car hit the plate flipping on its side, leaving the driver with severe bruising. The driver had to be cut from the car by the fire service following the incident and the car was written off.

The company pleaded guilty to breaching reg 37(3) of the Construction (Design and Management) Regs 2007 at a previous hearing.

An investigation by HSE found that the 2.5m-long plate, used to cover trenches in the road, had been raised six to eight inches from the ground, to make it easier to be collected later.

The investigation found that the road plate was protruding around two feet beyond a line of parked cars into oncoming traffic when the car hit it.

HSE Inspector Jane Beckmann said:

"The driver suffered severe bruising and longer lasting ill health effects as a result of this incident which could easily have been avoided.  Southern Gas Networks had a duty to adequately protect road users when it moved the metal plate, and it failed to plan the work effectively. This meant that motorists were put in danger.  All companies must remember that they have a responsibility to protect not only their own staff, but also members of the public when they carry out work."

Southern Gas Networks plc was also ordered to pay costs of £13,523.

Ed - Reg 37(3) of the Construction (Design and Management) Regs 2007 state: "any vehicle being used for the purposes of construction work shall when being driven, operated or towed be driven, operated or towed in such a manner as is safe in the circumstances; and be loaded in such a way that it can be driven, operated or towed safely."

Shropshire health trust fined over patient death

An 89-year-old man died after hospital staff left him with only one rail on his bed to prevent him from falling out.  Pensioner Francis Steele, of Lower Netchwood, Dilton Priors, near Bridgnorth, died two weeks after falling from his bed at Telford's Princess Royal Hospital on 21 November 2007.

Shrewsbury & Telford Hospital NHS Trust was fined £50,000 after admitting to health and safety breaches which led to the incident.  The HSE prosecuted the Trust after an investigation found the hospital had failed to provide Mr Steele with a bed rail that would have prevented the fall.

Shrewsbury Crown Court heard how a senior nurse decided that Mr Steele, described as very frail, needed bed rails but staff could only find one. Nobody made any further attempts to find another rail and the following day the elderly man was fatally injured when he fell from the open side of the bed.

The court was told that hospital staff did not know where to find the rails as there was no system of storage and heard evidence that staff did not look for another rail later in the shift. 

Shrewsbury & Telford Hospital NHS Trust, of Mytton Oak Road, Shrewsbury, pleaded guilty to breaching s3(1) HSWA. In addition to the fine it was ordered to pay £8,476 costs.

HSE investigating inspector Mr Lindsay Hope said:

"Shrewsbury & Telford Hospital NHS Trust's failure to provide a bed rail for a frail, vulnerable patient who urgently needed it is unacceptable.  The failure was compounded by chronic staff shortages. Just a few weeks before this incident, one nurse was so concerned by staffing levels in the ward she had written to the trust board, but no action was taken.  The trust's own policy was not to trigger any action on staff shortages until the levels became 'high risk'. As a result, the trust was typically working at high risk or very high risk.  It is a tragedy for Mr Steele and his family that Shrewsbury & Telford Hospital NHS Trust failed in its duty of care towards him."

Black Country firm fined after worker crushed

A Birmingham galvanising firm was sentenced on 17 November 2010 after a man was crushed to death when a crane's jig and load fell on him.  David Hunt, 49, from Dudley, was moving 500kg of metal components using a travelling crane when both the crane's jig and the load it was holding, weighing around 1.3 tonnes in total, fell directly onto him.

An investigation by the HSE found the lifting machinery that Mr Hunt had been using was unsuitable for the work and poorly maintained, so prosecuted Mr Hunt's employers, Ark Brothers Limited of Birmingham.

It also found that there was some wire wrapped round safety catches on the crane, suggesting that they did not always engage properly and additional measures had been needed.

At the time of the incident the firm was trading as Arkinstall Galvanising Ltd, and the incident happened at the firm's Ebro Works in Dudley Road, Tividale.

Wolverhampton Crown Court heard Mr Hunt, who had worked at the company for more than two decades, as had his father before him, was moving the metal components on 16 January 2008 when the incident occurred.

Ark Brothers Limited, of Charter House, Legge Street, Birmingham was fined £1,500 and ordered to pay £37,500 costs after pleading guilty to breaching Reg 4 of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regs 1998 and s2(1) HSWA.

HSE Inspector Judith Lloyd said:

"Mr Hunt's tragic death was completely avoidable and resulted directly from an unsafe system of work.  There were significant problems with the hooks on the crane and Ark Brothers ignored warnings as to their condition over several months, and no lessons were learnt from previous incidents.  Health and safety generally at the site was accorded a low priority, with the emphasis instead firmly on production.

Employees were regularly exposed to unacceptable risks to their health and safety. It is a tragedy for Mr Hunt and his family that his death could have been prevented if the company had taken proper precautions."

Chemical firm in court after fireball horror

A chemical company - Indorama Polymers Workington Limited - has been fined £20,000 after a welder suffered serious burns in a dust explosion at one of its plants in Cumbria.

David Lightfoot, 58, was carrying out welding work on a large container at Indorama Polymers (Workington) Ltd's site in Siddick. The container housed 380 tonnes of the explosive powder, Terephthalic acid.

The company was prosecuted by the HSE following an investigation into the cause of the explosion. Workington Magistrates' Court heard that, on 29 October 2008, Mr Lightfoot was welding a metal component around a two and a half inch diameter hole that had been sealed with a temporary bung, when he was suddenly engulfed by a fireball.

Mr Lightfoot, from Cockermouth, had been welding for around 20 seconds before finding himself surrounded by flames that forced him down to his hands and knees. He and another worker jumped ten feet to the ground to escape the flames but Mr Lightfoot was left with severe burns to his head, face, arms and hands.

The HSE investigation concluded the bung had fallen out, allowing around 15 grams of the explosive powder to escape, which was then ignited by the welding flame, creating the fireball.

David Lightfoot recovering from the explosion in hospital

The grandfather spent three days in intensive care with breathing difficulties, caused by swelling and blistering to his tongue and throat. He is still being treated for the scarring to his face more than two years after the incident.

Mr Lightfoot, who lives with his son, daughter-in-law, and three grandsons, said:

"I think my family were quite shocked when they first saw me but I'm just thankful it wasn't a lot worse, and no one else was injured.  I had to take a year off work to recover, and I still have injections in my forehead and face to try to reduce the scarring. I'll probably be scarred for the rest of my life though.  I was told that it would be safe to carry out welding work on the vessel but it wasn't. You trust people to get it right and check things out for you but you can't take anything for granted. I just hope this case helps prevent the same thing happening to someone else."

Michael Griffiths, the investigating inspector at HSE, said:

"This was an entirely preventable incident which caused serious burns to a man's hands and face, and has left him with significant scarring.  Indorama Polymers should have planned the work properly in advance. Either the welding should have been carried out before the hole was drilled into the vessel, or the explosive powder in that part of the vessel should have been removed before the welding started.  It is extremely important that chemical companies treat health and safety as their top priority, to avoid terrible injuries like this occurring again in the future."

Indorama Polymers Workington Ltd pleaded guilty to a breach of s3(1) HSWA by putting people not in their employment at risk. The company was ordered to pay costs of £14,941 in addition to the fine on 11 November.

Ed - Indorama Polymers (Workington) Ltd's parent company, Indorama Ventures Public Company Limited, is a Thailand-based company engaged in the manufacture and distribution of polyethylene terephthalate (PET) polymers, PET performs and PET bottles. Together with its subsidiaries, the company produces 958,000 tons per year of PET polymers. Its PET polymers are used in the manufacture of packaging materials for carbonated soft drinks, water, energy drinks, iced tea, juices and other beverages. The Company operates several PET polymers plants in Europe.

Goodyear Dunlop fined after worker suffers head injury

Wolverhampton tyre company, Goodyear Dunlop, was in court on 1 November 2010 after a teenage employee fractured his skull whilst maintaining machinery.

The HSE prosecuted Goodyear Dunlop Tyres UK Ltd after one of its maintenance team, Karl Illidge, struck his head at the firm's Stafford Road, Bushbury, Wolverhampton site.

Wolverhampton Magistrates heard that on 11 September 2009, Mr Illidge, a 17 year old apprentice, was working with two other mechanical maintenance engineers to repair a tyre press when the internal bladder of the press re-energised and burst. This blew the lid off the press with great force and noise, causing Mr Illidge to move very quickly out of the way and, in doing so, he struck his head on nearby equipment.

The firm, whose head office is in Erdington, Birmingham, was fined £18,250 and ordered to pay £4,807 costs after contravening S 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974.

HSE inspector Amarjit Kalay said:

"This incident was entirely preventable had there been a safe system in place to ensure that services to the press had been isolated prior to the start of the maintenance work. It is also clear that the maintenance team were insufficiently trained to carry out the necessary diagnostic work on this piece of machinery."

Three companies fined after man suffers serious leg injuries

Three companies have been fined a total of £24,500 after an electrician suffered serious leg injuries when he became trapped under a prefabricated wall.

Portsmouth Crown Court heard how Martin Cox, 28, from Hayling Island was injured after becoming trapped under the wall which he and six other men were attempting to lift.  The HSE prosecuted the firms over the incident that happened on the BAE Systems plc site in Broad Oak, Portsmouth on 20 August 2008.

Principal contractor Emcor Facilities Services Ltd and the subcontractor, BS Interiors (South) Ltd. had taken a decision to erect the 10.4m long, 2.8m metre high wall, flat on the floor due to the design of the building.

Once completed, seven workers including Emcor employee Mr Cox attempted to lift the 1,136 kilogram timber, fibreboard and metal mesh structure into place. When the lift was aborted, Mr Cox was left trapped beneath the wall suffering dislocated ankles and fractures to his left foot.  He was hospitalised for two weeks and afterwards used a wheelchair for a year and underwent intensive physiotherapy. Two years after the accident he is not able to work full-time and still suffers pain and disability.

BAE Systems Ltd took on the role of Construction Design and Management co-ordinator, which meant they had to ensure that the design could be built without risks to the health and safety of those doing the building work. They failed to carry out any such checks.

There were also issues with the planning of the operation and manual handling of the wall that were not identified by Emcor Facilities Services Ltd.

HM Specialist Inspector in Occupational Health, Anne Bartlett said:

"This case illustrates the importance of identifying hazards at the planning stage. This is the key aim of the Construction, Design and Management Regs 2007.  If a proper risk assessment had been carried out, those involved would have realise that manual handing of the wall would have created a real and obvious risk to those present. It defies common sense and was extremely foolhardy.  As a result for this failure Mr Cox sustained serious injuries that will affect him for the rest of his life, but which could so easily have been avoided."

BAE Systems Properties Ltd, of Warwick House, Farnborough Aerospace Centre, Farnborough, Hampshire, pleaded guilty to breaching reg 20(2)(c) of the Construction (Design and Management Regs) 2007 (by virtue of Reg 14(1) of the Construction (Design and Management Regs 2007) and was fined £8,000 with costs of £6,110

Emcor Facilities Services Ltd, of Birdhall Lane, Stockport, Cheshire, pleaded guilty to breaching Reg 22(1)(a) of the Construction (Design and Management) Regs 2007. The company was fined £15,000 and ordered to pay costs of £6,110.

BS Interiors (South) Ltd, of Cardiff Road, Portsmouth, pleaded guilty to breaching Reg 4 of the Manual Handling (Operations) Regs 1992. The company was fined £1,500 with no costs.

Ed - Reg 14(1) CDM Regs states: "Where a project is notifiable, the client shall appoint a person ("the CDM co-ordinator") to perform the duties specified in regs 20 and 21 as soon as is practicable after initial design work or other preparation for construction work has begun."

Reg 20(2)(c) CDM Regs states: "The CDM co-ordinator shall take all reasonable steps to ensure that designers comply with their duties under Regs 11 and 18(2)."

Reg 22(1)(a) CDM Regs states: "The principal contractor for a project shall: plan, manage and monitor the construction phase in a way which ensures that, so far as is reasonably practicable, it is carried out without risks to health or safety, including facilitating- (i) co-operation and co-ordination between persons concerned in the project in pursuance of regs 5 and 6, and; (ii) the application of the general principles of prevention in pursuance of reg 7."

Reg 4 Manual Handling (Operations) Regs 1992 states: "Each employer shall so far as is reasonably practicable, avoid the need for his employees to undertake any manual handling operations at work which involve a risk of their being injured."

Homebuilder fined after forklift crush death

A leading homebuilder - Linden - and one of its construction plant operators have been fined £14,500 after an incident on a site in Banbury left one man dead and two others severely injured.

On the morning of 11 January 2008, three ceramic tilers, Michael Whateley, 28, his brother Robert Whateley, and Paul Keen, all from Northampton, were waiting in a car for a building plot to be unlocked in Broughton Road, Banbury, in Oxfordshire.

Near the car, Keith Payne, of Gillett Road, Banbury, was undertaking routine checks of a telescopic materials handler - a forklift truck with an extendable arm or boom commonly referred to as a telehandler.

Mr Payne climbed into the cab of the truck, raised and then fully extended the unloaded boom of the telehandler in what he considered to be part of his routine daily checks. However, the truck tipped over and the forks at the end of the boom landed on the car, crushing the roof of the vehicle.  Michael Whateley died from his injuries. Robert Whateley suffered fractures to his spine, and a brain injury. Paul Keen suffered neck and spinal injuries, a broken ankle, broken ribs and a fractured breastbone.

At the time of the incident, Linden Limited was the principal contractor on the site and Mr Payne worked as a self-employed construction plant operator.

The HSE investigation showed the incident was preventable if Mr Payne had followed the operating instructions in the machinery manual and ensured the telehandler was being operated on firm level ground.  Instead, while on unsuitable ground he extended the boom of the machine to its limits while the telehandler was not suitably positioned.

Also, Linden Limited failed to ensure the equipment was maintained properly and tyre pressures were found to be lower than recommended.

Following the hearing, HSE Inspector James Powell said:

"This was a horrific accident that was totally avoidable. Construction sites have inherent risks, and even rough-terrain lift trucks have strict operational limits that need to be observed. With competent operation and suitable maintenance, tragedies like this should not happen.  Lives have been destroyed here and today's sentencing must serve to remind all employers and employees of their duties and responsibilities while using this type of machinery."

Keith Payne, of Banbury, Oxfordshire, was found guilty of breaching s 7 HSWA - he was fined £7,000.

Linden Limited, of Cowley Business Park, Cowley, Uxbridge, Hillingdon, pleaded guilty to reg 5 of the Provision and Use of Work equipment Regs 1998. The company was fined £7,500 and ordered to pay costs of £25,000.

Ed - s7 HSWA states: "It shall be the duty of every employee while at work... to take reasonable care for the health and safety of himself and of other persons who may be affected by his acts or omissions at work; and... as regards any duty or requirement imposed on his employer or any other person by or under any of the relevant statutory provisions, to cooperate with him so far as is necessary to enable that duty or requirement to be performed or complied with."

Reg 5 of The Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regs 1998 states: "Every employer shall ensure that work equipment is maintained in an efficient state, in efficient working order and in good repair [and] ensure that where any machinery has a maintenance log, the log is kept up to date."

Mitchells & Butler fined after asbestos exposure

Major pub operator Mitchells and Butler has been fined after three electricians and two plumbers were exposed to asbestos during refurbishment works at a Darlington pub.

Mitchells & Butlers Retail Ltd was refurbishing the vacant White Horse pub on Harrowgate Hill in Darlington, when the construction workers were potentially exposed to asbestos fibres.

An HSE investigation found that the company had commissioned a survey to check for the presence of asbestos in June 2007, but it was restricted to only those areas where the proposed refurbishment works were to be carried out.  The refurbishment plans were then changed before work started.

Bishop Auckland Magistrates' Court heard how on 28 September 2007, the electricians and plumbers started work in a kitchen area which had not been included in the original survey.

The ceiling tiles in the kitchen contained asbestos which meant that when the workers drilled into them with power tools, in preparation for new electrics and plumbing, dust and debris covered their faces and clothing, potentially exposing them to asbestos fibres.

Mitchells & Butlers Retail Ltd, of Fleet Street, Birmingham was fined a total of £14,001 after pleading guilty to breaching s3(1) HSWA and Reg 5 of the Control of Asbestos Regs 2006, and ordered to pay costs of £11,781.45.

HSE Inspector Victoria Wise said: "Construction and maintenance workers are among those most at risk from asbestos-related diseases due to the nature of their work. Asbestos is still widely present in buildings constructed prior to 2000, so workers can often inadvertently disturb materials containing asbestos if the correct survey has not been carried out to check for its presence and appropriate control measures put in place.  Mitchells & Butlers Retail Ltd knew there was asbestos in the building and should have ensured that all the areas where work was to be done had been checked for asbestos and the necessary precautions taken.

"Everyone who owns or operates commercial premises built prior to 2000 must ensure that a suitable and sufficient assessment for asbestos has been carried out prior to any construction work starting.  In addition construction and maintenance workers should have asbestos awareness training so that they can recognise that some materials may contain asbestos and know what action to take."

Among the workers exposed was Jonathan Cook, 38, from Cleethorpes. He said: "Because the effects of asbestos take a long time to show up, the worry of whether the asbestos has caused lasting damage to my health will stay with me for years to come.  And it's not just me - it's a huge worry for my partner also, as there is a chance that she might have been exposed to fibres that were brought home on my work clothes."

London waste company fined after worker's legs crushed

A London-based waste management firm has been fined after an employee's legs were crushed between two steel frames while unloading a truck.  McGrath Bros (Waste Control) Ltd was prosecuted by the HSE following the incident on 10 January 2008.

A driver employed by McGrath Bros was unloading steel frames from a delivery lorry with two colleagues at a site at Debden Wharf, River Road, in Barking.  The frames were resting on top of building rubble inside the truck and the men attempted to lift one frame using a crane and chains.

While it was being unloaded, one of the chains slipped causing the hoisted frame to slip and fall back into the truck, crushing the victim's legs as he became trapped between the two 700 kg steel-fabricated frames.

McGrath Bros (Waste Control) Ltd of McGrath House, Hepscott Road, Hackney, had been making large steel frames at its Hackney site and transporting them to the Debden Wharf site.

The frames, which individually measured 9m by 1.6m by 30cm, had a total weight of up to 1.4 tonnes.  The man suffered nine fractures in his legs and he had to spend six months in hospital and nursing homes and was off work for 14 months.

At City of London Magistrates' Court, McGrath (Waste Control) Ltd pleaded guilty to breaching s 2 (1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974. The company was fined £14,000 and ordered to pay £7,447 in costs.

HSE Inspector Kevin Smith said:

"This was a very distressing incident which could and should have been avoided. Instead, a man was left with terrible injuries as a result of a badly planned lifting operation.  The company failed in its most basic duty to protect this worker. This case should serve as a timely reminder to firms that all aspects of work need risk assessments which examine all of the relevant risks and are communicated to everyone involved. It can ruin lives when these simple precautions are not taken."

Solihull construction firm fined for worker's burns

A Solihull construction firm has been fined after one of its workers suffered burns when his drill hit a power cable.

The worker was using a pneumatic drill to d ig a trench at the Taylor Wimpey housing development at Westminster Place in Rushall, Walsall, when he struck an 11kv cable under the pavement on 13 August 2009.  He suffered severe burns from the resulting flash and was airlifted to Selly Oak Hospital in Birmingham for emergency treatment.

An HSE investigation found that Pacestone Construction Ltd had failed to take sufficient steps to protect its employees from the risk presented by underground cables. The worker was unaware of where they were located on the site.

Pacestone Construction Limited, of Freda House, Oak Farm, Catherine De Barnes, pleaded guilty to breaching Reg 34(3) of the Construction (Design and Management) Regs 2007. It was fined £13,000 and ordered to pay £3,870 costs by Walsall Magistrates' Court.

HSE inspector David Price said:

"This incident was entirely preventable had the company taken sensible precautions. Using a cable detector, marking the location of cables and only allowing workers to use hand tools when digging in the proximity of live services would have avoided the risk of hitting cables.  Serious injury or even death can result from contact with electricity. It's essential that employers have safe working procedures for any work involving electrical plant, cabling or equipment."

Ed - HSE guidance on working safely on construction sites and avoiding danger from underground services can be found in booklet HSG47.

Around 1,000 electrical accidents at work are reported to HSE each year and about 25 people die of their injuries. For more information about working safely with electricity go to www.hse.gov.uk/electricity

Reg 34(3) of the Construction (Design and Management) Regs 2007 states:  No construction work which is liable to create a risk to health or safety from an underground service, or from damage to or disturbance of it, shall be carried out unless suitable and sufficient steps (including any steps required by this reg) have been taken to prevent such risk, so far as is reasonably practicable.

This is a statement of the obvious!

Nitrogen knocks out employee inside machine

The HSE has prosecuted a Black Country recycling firm after nitrogen gas, used to stop explosions, lead to a worker passing out.

Halesowen Magistrates Court heard that it was usual for workers at Overton Recycling to climb into the chute of a fridge recycling machine at the company's site in Rufford Street, Lye.

On 1 June 2009, Stephen Barnes, 47, from Birmingham, was working on the machine used to recycle fridges.  A chute fed the fridges inside the machine to be broken up, but as they have the potential to explode, the machine contained nitrogen gas to help reduce the risk of a blast.

Sometimes the fridges would twist and get stuck and it was usual for workers to climb in to clear the blockages. When Mr Barnes did this on the day of the incident, the nitrogen inside the chute made him pass out so he had to be rescued by a colleague.

He was taken to hospital and was off work for three days and although he made a full physical recovery, he has since suffered from a lack of sleep, flashbacks and mood swings that are only now subsiding.

A HSE inspection found the presence of the nitrogen in the chute had not been assessed before people got inside to clear blockages. The company had also failed to carry out a suitable and sufficient risk assessment that would have identified the risks of climbing into a confined space. The company should also have had a system in place for clearing blockages that did not require entry in to the chute.

HSE inspector Angela Gallagher said:

"Companies need to ensure all machinery and processes are properly assessed. Had this been done, the nitrogen would have been identified as a hazard and the chute recognised as a confined space with the right safety systems installed.  All too often in cases like this we see multiple fatalities as people try to rescue a colleague from a confined space without taking precautions themselves. It is fortunate that no one was more seriously harmed on this occasion."

The company pleaded guilty to breaching Reg 3(1) of the Confined Spaces Regs 1997 and Reg 3(1) of the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regs 1999 and was fined £13,000 and ordered to pay £6,107 costs.

Ed - Reg 3(1) of the Confined Spaces Regs 1997 states: "Every employer shall... ensure compliance with the provisions of these Regs in respect of any work carried out by his employees; and... ensure compliance, so far as is reasonably practicable, with the provisions of these Regs in respect of any work carried out by persons other than his employees insofar as the provisions relate to matters which are within his control."

Reg 3(1) of the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regs 1999 states: "Every employer shall make a suitable and sufficient assessment of... the risks to the health and safety of his employees to which they are exposed whilst they are at work; and... the risks to the health and safety of persons not in his employment arising out of or in connection with the conduct by him of his undertaking"

Recticel fined after worker falls through roof

A foam manufacturer has been fined after a worker fell through a roof at its Derbyshire factory.

The worker was repairing a leaking roof at Recticel Ltd in Alfreton on 28 January 2009. He had fixed the leak and was walking back down the roof when he fell through a fragile roof light.

A HSE investigation found Recticel had failed to properly plan the work and consider the risks from fragile surfaces.

The worker fell approximately four metres onto a conveyor belt below, and then onto the floor. He suffered tissue damage and was off work for six weeks. The incident has left him with residual pain and stiffness.

HSE inspector Noelle Walker said:

"Work at height remains one of the biggest causes of injury in the workplace.  The work had not been properly planned by Recticel and the company failed to take into account the risk posed by the roof light.  Proper planning is as important for small short-term roof repairs as it is for larger jobs and in this case it would have prevented a worker being injured."

Recticel Ltd, of Bluebell Close, Clover Nook Industrial Park, Alfreton, Derbyshire admitted breaching regs 4(1) and 9(1) of the Work at Height Regs and was fined a total of £13,000 and £5,098 costs.

Ed - Reg 4(1) of the Work at Height Regs 2005 states: "Every employer shall ensure that work at height is (a) properly planned; (b) appropriately supervised; and (c) carried out in a manner which is so far as is reasonably practicable safe, and that its planning includes the selection of work equipment in accordance with reg 7."

Reg 9(1) of the Work at Height regs 2005 states: "Every employer shall ensure that no person at work passes across or near, or works on, from or near, a fragile surface where it is reasonably practicable to carry out work safely and under appropriate ergonomic conditions without his doing so."

Teenage student at risk of injury

A Writtle agricultural college has been prosecuted for potentially endangering a teenage student.

Chelmsford Magistrates Court heard how John Huntley, 19 at the time of the incident on 11 August 2009, was carrying out six months of practical work at the college's farm when he was able to use a baling machine with no guarding.

An investigation by the HSE found that the baler had previously been used numerous times without the guard and there was a lack of training, monitoring and supervision.

Writtle College, of Lordship Lane, Chelmsford, admitted a charge of breaching  s2(1) HSWA and was fined £7,000 and breaching Reg 11 of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regs 1998. and fined £5,000, with £1,986.65 costs.

HSE inspector, Keith Waller, said:

"This part of the machine, known as a power take off (PTO) shaft is a common cause of serious injuries in farming. When a piece of clothing - which can be as small as a single thread - touches a spinning PTO shaft, it can be pulled around very rapidly, dragging the clothing and the person wearing into the shaft and often resulting in loss of limb or death.  As an agricultural college, training the farmers of the future, Writtle should take its health and safety responsibilities very seriously. The farming students that graduate from the college are entering an industry which, according to HSE statistics released last month, is now officially the UK's most dangerous industry.

Between April 2009 and March 2010, 38 people died on British farms and there were 640 reported major injuries such as broken bones or amputations.

Ed - I am surprised this case is reported to have been prosecuted under s2 HSWA.  Students are not normally considered to be employees although this student may well have been.  Typically risks posed to students by educational institutions are prosecuted under s3 HSWA.

Firms fined £22,000 after worker suffers facial burns

Two firms were fined a total of £22,000 after a worker received facial burns when he cut through an underground electrical cable.  Miller Construction (UK) Limited and Lawrie (Demolition) Limited were each fined £11,000 after pleading guilty to charges under HSWA.

On 24 June 2008 Valentin Talijanov, an employee of Lawrie (Demolition) Limited, cut through a 415 volt electric cable at the City Wharf redevelopment site in Aberdeen.

Principal Contractor Miller Construction (UK) Limited, Miller House, 2 Lochside View, Edinburgh Park, Edinburgh pleaded guilty to a charge under S 3(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974. Subcontractor Lawrie (Demolition) Limited, Rigifa, Cove, Aberdeen pleaded guilty to a charge under s2(1) HSWA.

The case was heard at Aberdeen Sheriff Court.

Fine after farm worker suffers severe electrical burns

A farm worker sustained severe injuries after getting an electric shock while working for one of the largest potato growers in the UK.

David McMullan was working with irrigation equipment at Crouchmoor Farm in Littleport, Cambridgeshire in October 2009. As he lifted one of the irrigation pipes it made contact with the 33,000 volt overhead power line.

The resulting electric shock meant Mr McMullan, 20, from Armoy, County Antrim suffered internal injuries and severe burns which led to his big toe being amputated. The HSE prosecuted his employers Waldersley Farms Limited, after an investigation.

Ely Magistrates Court heard Waldersley Farms has working premises covering 11,000 acres across Norfolk and Cambridgeshire but the HSE probe found a lack of training and information given to employees and contractors. There had also been no assessment on how to carry out the work safely.

The farming firm based at Lynn Road, Southery, Downham Market, admitted breaching Reg 4(3) of the Electricity at Work Regs 1989.and was fined £10,000 with £2,223.38 costs.

HSE inspector, Stephen Faulkner, said:

"This was a horrible incident which was entirely preventable had his employers made Mr McMullan aware of the overhead power lines and the risk they posed to the working environment.  Mr McMullan is lucky to be alive. However, that doesn't deflect from the severity of the injuries he suffered and the nine weeks he spent in hospital.

"Between ten and fifteen people are killed each year by inadvertent contact with overhead power lines, and on average two of these work in agriculture. Employers must ensure that appropriate training and supervision is provided to employees and contractors and a sufficient risk assessment must also be carried out."

Other cases in brief:

Defendants	Offences	Penalty	Description
Elmatic (Cardiff) Ltd	Reg11 PUWER 1998	£8,000 fine & £6,691.45 costs	Untrained 21 employee injured by unguarded drill.
Callender (Lancashire) Aeropart Ltd	Reg11 PUWER 1998	£8,000 fine & £3,996 costs	Employee injured by unguarded milling machine
Coast and Country Housing Ltd - a social landlord	Reg 4(3)  Electricity at Work Regs 1989 and Reg 3(1) Management of Health and Safety at Work Regs 1999	£8,000 fine & £2,939.20 costs	Underground services strike with 5' iron bar whilst planting trees
Retro Future 2000 Ltd	Reg 6(3) of the Work at Height Regs 2005	£7,000 fine & £1,981 costs	Failure to protect workers from risk of fall at construction site
Recticel Limited	S3(1) HSWA	£6,238 fine & £11,762 costs	Strike by falling load
(1) Kent Road Construction Limited  (2) Mr S K Sharma, trading as Fortmere Construction	(1) Reg 8(1) of the Lifting Operations and Lifting Equipment Reg 1998. (2) Reg 14(1) of the Construction (Design and Management) Reg 2007.	(1) £6,000 & £4,496 costs;   (2)£4,000 & £899 costs	Strike by falling load of roof trusses being unloaded
Ossian Construction Ltd	S2 HSWA	£6,000	Collapsed staircase injured two construction workers
Andrew McElvaney	Reg 4(1) of the Work at Height Regs 2005	£5,000 fine & £2,916 costs	Working on roof to replace broken tiles without appropriate safety equipment
PinguinLutosa Foods UK Ltd	Reg 11(1) PUWER 1998 and Reg 3(1)(b) of the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regs 1999	£4,700 fine & £2,639.50 costs	Worker clearing ice inside industrial freezer - freezer switched on when he was inside - rotating blades struck him.  Dimly lit freezer
BenhamGoodHeadPrint Limited	Reg 11(1) PUWER and Reg 3(1) MHSR  1999	£4,000 fine & £,289 costs	Hand injury from unguarded moving machinery
Mr Davies	Regs 5, 10(1) and 11(1)(a) Control of Asbestos at Work Regs 2006.	£3,000 fine & £1,615 costs	Exposing 4 employees to asbestos, failure to perform risk assessments, failure to provide appropriate training
Kevin Banks - t/a KB Building Services	Reg 13(2) CDM 2007	£2,000 fine & £4,052 costs	Employed a 14 year old (illegal although not charged with that) who  operated dumper truck which overturned injuring the child - offence failure to plan, manage and monitor construction work carried out under his control
(1) Brian Hulme (2) Jack Hulme	Reg9(2) COSHH 2002	Each fined £400 with £1,707 costs	Failure to ensure regular checks on dust extraction unit - required to be done every 14 months
The Norfolk Ranger Limited	S1(1) Employers' Liability Compensation Act 1969	£700 fine & £300 costs	Failure to have Employers Liability Insurance
Neil Brown	Reg 10(1)(a) Control of Asbestos Regulations 2006	£360 fine & £360 costs	Failure to provide asbestos awareness training
Magna Heating Company Limited (in liquidation)	Reg 13(2) CDM Regs 2007	£1	Failure to protect employees from risks posed by underground services - 11kv cable struck by mini breaker

 

Environment Agency Prosecutions

Confiscation of the proceeds of Environmental Crime

After four years of sustained and targeted work, the Environment Agency has obtained restitution from an environmental criminal. Mr Owen Baguley has been ordered to pay back £116,101 earned through his illegal waste activity.  Failure to pay this within six months will result in an automatic custodial sentence of two years and three months. 

Mr Baguley had pleaded guilty of eight waste offences for running illegal waste sites in and around the Blackpool area. The hazardous nature of the materials being stored meant that there was increased potential to cause harm to both the environment and human health. For these offences Mr Baguley has been sentenced to a two year conditional discharge.

Despite previous convictions and warnings from Environment Agency officers, Mr Baguley has continued to use a series of sites to store illegal waste. Due to the serious nature of the offences and the continued disregard for the environment and our officers, the Environment Agency took action under the Proceeds of Crime Act to bring his activities to an end. 

Following complaints from members of the public and through working with the local authority, Lancashire Police, and Lancashire Fire and Rescue service investigations found Mr Baguley to be operating sites illegally and benefiting financially from these activities. 

Andy Brown, Environment Manager for the Environment Agency said,

"The Environment Agency works hard to protect and improve the environment.  Sites such as those owned and operated by Mr Baguley that don't have a valid permit in place have the potential to cause serious harm to the environment, as well as undercutting other legitimate businesses who operate legally nearby.  The result achieved in court from this case sends out a clear message to anyone involved in environmental crime that waste crime is a serious crime, and that the Environment Agency has the powers to bring these criminals to justice."

Lexon UK Limited falls shorts on recycling obligations

A Redditch based distributor of pharmaceutical goods Lexon UK Limited has been fined £25,200 for failing to recycle packaging.   In addition, the company was ordered to pay £3,114.49 in costs, along with a £5,558 in compensation.  The company pleaded guilty to 21 charges under the Packaging Regulations.

The company should have been registered with the Environment Agency and was obliged to recover and recycle a portion of its packaging waste, as well as filing a certificate at the end of each year to confirm it had met these obligations.

However, the company did not register with a compliance scheme until 2010.

The court heard that a routine check by the Environment Agency in October 2008 established that the company should have been registered in previous years.

Jill Crawford, prosecuting for the Environment Agency, said the company's explanation for failing to comply with the Packaging Waste Regs was that it was "unaware" that it was 'an obligated' company under the regulations.

By failing to register, the company had avoided fees and other costs of £7,073.

Speaking after the case, Investigating Officer David Lloyd said:

"The Packaging Regulations are designed to reduce the amount of packaging used by businesses and increase the amount of packaging waste recycled. This case highlights that businesses need to consider if they are obligated under the Packaging Regulations."

In mitigation, the court heard that the company had cooperated with the investigation. In addition, the company is now fully compliant.

The charges were brought by the Environment Agency under the Producer Responsibility Obligations (Packaging Waste) Regulations 1997 and 2005, and the Environment Act 1995.

Anglian Water ruins crops with sewage

Anglian Water has been fined a total of £22,000 and ordered to pay costs of £4,489 after a rising main burst twice in seven months.

Sewage from the main running through Hall Farm in Shipdham ruined crops both times in August 2009 and March 2010 and polluted the River Blackwater, a tributary of the River Yare, Swaffham Magistrates' Court heard.

Claire Bentley, prosecuting for the Environment Agency told the court that there had been three previous incidents of the main bursting at the site leading to surrounding land being saturated with sewage.  In the third incident the River Blackwater was also polluted.

After the third historic incident in 2007 Anglian Water had been formally warned by the Agency as the pollution had been acute and serious, Miss Bentley said.

The company then discussed replacing the main, which had been installed by the local authority in 1967, but wrote to the landowner in April 2009 saying the proposal had not been selected for funding.  Four months later the main burst again.

Miss Bentley told the court that the farmer's crops of elephant grass, grown for use as bio-fuel, had been lost and the discharge into the River Blackwater was grossly polluting. The farmer had also been advised not to carry out his hobby of shooting as consultants advised him not to take home game from his land for human consumption.

"Anglian Water was aware of ongoing problems with this stretch of the rising main. On a cost benefit analysis the company made a deliberate decision not to recommend replacement," she told magistrates.

A letter to the Agency in January 2010 said replacement of the rising main was being considered but in March an email from an asset planner from the company to a representative of the land owner said it was regretted that the rising main had once again burst causing pollution, however replacement of the rising main was not a priority for investment in 2010/11.

"Although OFWAT has determined the defendant's capital works budget for the next five years from April 2010, it is the company's own system that prioritises works," said Miss Bentley.

In both incidents Anglian Water refused to attend an interview under caution but did provide an account of the first incident, the court was told. In it they stated that they had initially been unable to carry out repairs to the pipe and clean up as they had been refused access to the site by the landowner until midday two days later.

After the second incident an Environment Agency officer reported hearing the landowner giving directions to Anglian Water to access the site. When the officer contacted the company later to find out why they hadn't arrived he was told the landowner was obstructing access.

In mitigation, Ms Arabella Prothero for Anglian Water said the company was now going to replace the rising main and work was scheduled for March 2011 at a cost of £137,000 to the company.

She said the company apologised for the incidents.

Mrs J Smith, chairman of the magistrates, stated that the offences were accidental and not deliberate.

After the hearing Environment Agency officer Brian Hudson said: "There is a burden on water companies to consider and responsibly manage pollution risks.  Sewage is highly polluting and can cause serious damage to rivers and streams. These pollutions were regrettable and avoidable."
 
Ed - Anglian Water Services Ltd pleaded guilty to:

1. On or about 3 August 2009, you did cause poisonous, noxious or polluting matter, to enter controlled waters, namely the River Blackwater a tributary of the River Yare at Hall Farm, Shipdham, Norfolk contrary to s 85(1) and 85(6) of the Water Resources Act 1991.

2. On or about 25 March 2010, you did cause poisonous, noxious or polluting matter, to enter controlled waters, namely the River Blackwater a tributary of the River Yare at Hall Farm, Shipdham, Norfolk contrary to s 85(1) and 85(6) of the Water Resources Act 1991.

Birmingham man ordered to pay over £40,000 for waste crimes

Ali Raza Baig, of Handsworth Wood, Birmingham, was sentenced on Friday 19 November 2010 at Birmingham Magistrates' Court after having previously pleaded guilty to three offences.  The charges concerned the operation of un-permitted waste sites around the city, where significant amounts of waste had been dumped and stored.

Mr Baig saved thousands of pounds in his illegal activities.

The first offence related to the site of the former public house, 'The Uplands', on Oxhill Road, Handsworth. The site was visited by Environment Agency officers on a number of occasions from May 2009 to August 2009.  Various types of waste including household waste, plastics and metal were observed. On one occasion it was estimated that 300 cubic metres of waste was present.  In an interview with the Environment Agency, Mr Baig confirmed that he had brought waste to the site.

The second site concerned land at the A1 Trading Estate, Lewisham Road, Smethwick. On 1 July 2009, officers from Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council attended the site and witnessed significant amounts of waste including assorted domestic waste, soils and rubble some of which Mr Baig admitted he had dumped

The third offence related to a site on Heath Street, Winson Green between October 2009 and December 2009.  On 14 October 2009, environment officers witnessed waste including green waste, soil and rubble, estimated to be 1170 cubic metres in size. Another visit on 5 December 2009 identified further waste.

Speaking after the case Dave Thrussell, an Environment Agency officer in charge of the investigation, said: "This is a great result for the Environment Agency and shows that the courts are taking this type of environmental crime seriously.

"As well as the risk to the environment, by storing waste without suitable infrastructure in place, Mr Baig was cheating those skip companies who are working with the Environment Agency and have obtained Environmental Permits and set their sites up correctly."

In sentencing the defendant, the Court took into account the large amounts of waste, the avoided cost of the Environmental Permits and the risk of pollution. Mr Baig was fined £21,000 and ordered to pay compensation to the Environment Agency of £14,823, costs of £4,458.21, together with a £15 victim surcharge.

Luxury ice cream supplier fined for packaging offences

A Guildford supplier of premium ice cream and frozen desserts - Scholler Ice Cream Limited has been ordered to pay more than £17,500 for failing to comply with waste packaging legislation.

Guildford Magistrates' Court ordered Scholler Ice Cream Limited to pay fines of £7,500, £7,656 in avoided registration fees and £2,499 in costs to the Environment Agency, a total of £17,655.

The company, of Mill Lane in Chilworth, is part of the Nestle Group and imports and supplies Movenpick Ice Cream and more than 150 other dessert products. It pleaded guilty at the first opportunity to six offences of failing to register with the Environment Agency under the Producer Responsibility Obligations (Packaging Waste) Regs 2007 and for failing to meet obligations to recover and recycle packaging waste for the years 2006-2008. It asked the court to take a further 12 similar offences into consideration for the years 2000-2005.

Scholler first became aware of the full extent of the requirements to register and recycle after the Environment Agency contacted it in October 2009. It has since registered with a compliance scheme.

Magistrates gave credit for the company's early guilty plea and co-operation with the Environment Agency throughout its investigation.

Carol Getting, investigating officer for the Environment Agency, said: "It is disappointing that although the regulations have been in force for over a decade, the requirements are still widely misunderstood. The Packaging Regulations generate more than £80 million of investment into the recycling industry annually and have driven a significant reduction in packaging waste being disposed in landfill."

Chicken farms run illegally for three years

Poultry farmer Philip Roy Hart trading as PR & CR Hart has been fined a total of £16,000 and ordered to pay costs of £2,500 for illegally running two units for thousands of broiler chickens in Suffolk.

An aerial mapping system was used by the Environment Agency to locate one site after it received a report of an illegal operation in the area in October 2009, Bury St Edmunds Magistrates' Court was told.

White Cottage Farm, Combes Lane, Great Finborough, was identified as the offending site and an investigating officer visited.

Investigations identified that there had been between 72,000 and 119,000 birds at the farm between February 2007 and January 2010, Mrs Anne-Lise McDonald, prosecuting for the Environment Agency, told the court.

During discussions with Hart and his consultants the officer became aware that he ran another unpermitted poultry unit at Valley Farm, Great Finborough which stocked between 42,750 and 53,750 birds between January 2007 and January 2010.

Hart holds a permit for another poultry unit with 130,000 places for rearing chickens for meat production in Norfolk so was aware of the need to be permitted, Mrs McDonald told magistrates.

She said the offences were committed for three years showing a regular breach.  By not applying for a permit, annual subsistence fees totalling more than £14,000 had been saved.

Hart said he had been intending to apply for a permit for the sites.

Magistrates heard that a permit had since been applied for and granted for Valley Farm and an application had been made for White Cottage Farm.

In mitigation Mrs Deborah Sharples said Hart had not yet applied for permits due to his and his family suffering health problems.

She said he was a good farmer but not very good at his paper work.

After the hearing Environment Agency officer Miss Fleur Howell said: "There should be a level playing field for all similar businesses.  This creates an imbalance in the market and can result in more and more businesses operating illegally."

London restaurant company served with fine for packaging offences

City of Westminster Magistrates' Court has fined Gioma UK Ltd £13,500 and ordered it to pay compensation of £8,408, representing the registration fees. It also ordered the company to pay £3,004 in costs to the Environment Agency and the victim surcharge of £15, a total of £24,927.

The company, of Swallow Street, central London, pleaded guilty to failing to register with the Environment Agency, and failing to recover and recycle packaging waste in 2007, 2008 and 2009 by purchasing Packaging Recovery Notes as provided by the Regs. The company, which runs a chain of 14 restaurants, asked the court to take 14 similar matters between 2000 and 2006 into consideration.

Environment Agency routine checks revealed that Gioma UK Ltd was not registered with a compliance scheme. The company then joined a compliance scheme in 2010.
It was estimated the company avoided costs of £20,165 by not registering and not purchasing the correct amount of Packaging Recovery Notes between 2000 and 2009. The company's main packaging activity is that of seller, and materials handled include glass, plastic and cardboard.

Oil spill costs company over £17,500

On Thursday 17 November 2010 Mark Group Limited of Leicester pleaded guilty at Worcester Magistrates Court to polluting the Barbourne Brook at Gheluvelt Park, Worcester.

The charges were brought by the Environment Agency for water pollution under the Water Resources Act.  The company was fined a total of £12,000 and ordered to pay costs of £5,563.53 plus the £15 victim surcharge. 

Mark Group Limited is a home insulation company who in November 2008 were closing down their depot at Northbrook Close in Barbourne.

For the Environment Agency, Sheila Abrahams told the court that on 14th November 2008 Environment Agency officers received calls about oil on the Barbourne Brook.  The source was traced to an outfall at Northbrook Close in Barbourne where officers discovered staining on the yard of Mark Group's premises and on the road, consistent with someone washing down oil into the drains.  They found three road gullies containing substantial amounts of oil.

The company claimed that their employees unwittingly passed a redundant oil tank to some individuals whom they presumed were from a company Mark Group had asked to pick up the tank.  The unidentified individuals dropped the tank whilst trying to load it on to a lorry, resulting in the oil spill.  There was no spill clean- up equipment on site.

The oil flowed in to the Barbourne Brook, through Gheluvelt Park.  The pond at Gheluvelt Park is home to a pair of swans who were coated in oil.  The swans were successfully rescued and treated by Bishopswood Swan Rescue.  The pond at Gheluvelt Park is a popular spot for families to feed the ducks. 

In mitigation, the company apologised to the court for the incident and accepted responsibility for the offence. They said they had an unblemished record with no previous convictions since they started trading in 1974. The court gave them credit for an early guilty plea.

Speaking after the case, an Environment Agency officer involved in the investigation said: "This company failed to fulfil some pretty basic environmental responsibilities, resulting in the serious oiling of some wildfowl.  Companies who do not train or supervise their staff properly will be held to account for any pollution they cause.  If the company had made sure these oil tanks were properly handled this whole incident could have been avoided.  Companies are legally obliged to check that all wastes they produce are passed to a Registered Waste Carrier."

£10,000 fine for illegal waste site

Skip hire operator John Gregory Hayes has been fined £10,000 for running an illegal waste site, discovered in an early morning raid by the Environment Agency, police and other organisations.  Hayes was also ordered to pay full costs of £1,258.

When officers arrived at Morelands Industrial Estate in Rettendon in January 2010 they saw smoke and smelled burning from inside a locked site.

Harlow Magistrates' Court heard that there were skips of waste inside and outside the unit and a skip lorry with an email address for Essex Skip Hire on the side.

Mrs Anne-Lise McDonald, prosecuting for the Agency, told the court waste was also being stored on the ground inside the unit.  She told magistrates that Hayes had been issued with an enforcement notice in March 2007 to remove waste from the same unit at the industrial estate and told then that it was an offence to store waste on site without an environmental permit.

Hayes fully co-operated with the investigation and told investigating officers that he had been operating from the site for six years under the name of First Essex Waste Clearance. He said he normally took the waste straight to a tip except when it was too late and he took it back to the Moreland Estate.

He said he had lit the fire because it was cold.

Mrs McDonald said the activities were deliberate and  Hayes had saved money by not registering.

Ed - Hayes pleaded guilty to:

On or about 19 January 2010 at Unit 36, Morelands Industrial Estate, Tileworks Lane, Rettendon, Essex, you did operate a regulated facility, namely a waste operation for the deposit, storage, sorting and disposal of waste by burning, without being authorised by an environmental permit granted under Reg 13 of the Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regs 2007 contrary to Reg 12 and 38(1)(a) of the Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regs 2007.

Ecosystem damaged by bulb waste

A nursery company responsible for a pollution which had a catastrophic effect on a tributary of the River Nene has been fined £10,000.  PS & JE Ward Ltd pleaded guilty at King's Lynn Magistrates' Court to causing the pollution at Belmont Nursery, Long Road, Terrington St Clement, King's Lynn in May and was ordered to pay costs of £6,178.

Miss Claire Bentley, prosecuting for the Environment Agency, said that discharge from a pipe into the stream at the site was grossly polluting. "The discharge caused a catastrophic impact on the water rendering the invertebrate ecosystem completely lifeless in the vicinity of the discharge.  There was also evidence suggesting that the discharge had been occurring over an extended period."

Miss Bentley told the court that the polluting liquid had come from a stockpile of bulbs and cut flower stems in the yard at the nursery. Liquid ran from the pile, across a concrete surface and into a drain 11m away.

Agency officers responding to a call about the state of the stream saw black spots in it and scum on the surface. Dye tracing confirmed that the source of the pollution was the nursery.

Miss Bentley told the court immediately downstream of the discharge pipe the stream was 'entirely full with rotten waste'.

She said survey results indicated a long-standing disturbance of the ecosystem and evidence that the discharge had been happening for weeks or months. 7.7km downstream the water quality was still poor.

Director Peter Ward told Environment Agency officers that the waste had been stored in the yard for two months and the company had not realised there was a problem. He had not been aware that run-off from green waste was highly polluting.

As soon as the company became aware of the problem it blocked the outlet and a few days later a waste contractor removed the pile of waste from the yard and used it as organic matter on a company field.

Mr Ward said that since the incident there was a new company policy to spread all green waste onto the fields where the plants are grown.

Other cases in brief

Defendants	Offences	Penalty	Description
(1) Paul Johnson (2) Shelley Smailes	(1) S33(1)(a) EPA 1990 x2 (2) Environmental Permitting Regulations 2007	(1) £2,200 + £5,000 & £4,500 costs (2) £1,000 & £650 costs	(1) unlawful deposit of controlled waste at two sites; (2) permitting an illegal waste operation on land under her control
Stephen Lack t/a Abbey Skips	(1)S33(1)(b) EPA 1990 (2) S34 EPA 1990	(1) £4,000 (2) £1,000 in fines & £2,500 costs	(1) Burning waste at a waste transfer station - unlicensed disposal activity; (2) breach of the duty of care as regards waste
RC Treatt & Co Limited	S 34(1)(aa) and 34(6) Environmental Protection Act 1990.	£3,500 fine & £3,858.30 costs	Causing a breach of another's Environmental Permit - cause misdescription of waste - contaminated glass consigned
(1) Philip Pidgely (2)FDS Waste Services Ltd	[not stated]	(1) £2,500 fine & £979 costs (2) Conditional discharge & £979 costs	Handling hazardous wastes at transfer station not licensed for that purpose

 

HSE Policy Announcements

Farming safety gains wiped out, new statistics reveal

There has been a sharp rise in the number of people killed or seriously injured on British farms which has wiped out previously achieved safety gains.

New figures released by the HSE show that in Britain between April 2009 and March 2010, the number of reported major injuries, such as broken bones or amputations, rose to 640, up from 599 the previous year.

The number of major injuries has now increased by more than 40 per cent in the last three years.

In June it was announced that 38 people died as a result of work on farms last year - up from 25 twelve months ago and above the average of 37 for the previous five years. With a rate of fatal injuries to workers in 2009/10 of 8 per 100,000, agriculture remains Britain's most dangerous industry.

Sandy Blair, HSE's Board champion for agriculture, said:

"The agricultural community has responded magnificently to our Make the Promise campaign to improve safety in farming, and we've seen everyone from industry leaders like the National Farmers Unions for England, Scotland and Wales to individual farmers getting behind the initiative.  But these figures show the reality of what we are dealing with - deaths have returned to previous levels and serious injuries are still steadily increasing.

"This isn't about statistics - it is about the farming community itself being able to take action to prevent these serious, life-changing or life-ending injuries. If we're going to see sustainable change, it needs to be led from within farming itself.  More worrying is the estimate that only around 30 per cent of agricultural injuries are reported.  Each death or injury leaves a trail of misery and suffering for individuals and farming families. It's more important than ever that we work together to get this right."

Across all industries in 2009/10, 152 workers were fatally injured in Britain - down from 179 the previous year. This is the lowest level on record, with 0.5 deaths per 100,000 workers.

Although only around 1.5 per cent of the working population is employed in agriculture, it accounted for one in four work-related deaths last year.

The number of injuries serious enough to keep farmers off work for three or more days fell slightly, to 1096 from 1188. Estimated levels of work-related ill health in agriculture have also gone down.

Fewer deaths and injuries in manufacturing, but improvement still needed

Waste Recycling deaths

The combined fatal and major injury rate in waste and recycling is more than four times the average across all industries.  416 employees per 100,000 suffer a major injury or are killed at work compared with the all industry average rate of 102 per 100,000, according to the latest statistics released by the HSE .

A total of 530 major injuries to employees in waste and recycling were reported in 2009/10 - a fall of 10 per cent on the previous year when 590 major injuries were reported. Major injuries, such as amputations and broken limbs account for around one in four injuries in the sector.

Provisional fatality figures for 2009/10 also show that four employees were killed as a result of working in waste and recycling between April 2009 and March 2010 - three fewer than in 2008/09. Three members of the public also died in relation to work activities in the waste and recycling sector during 2009/10.

There was little discernable improvement in injuries that kept people away from work for three days or more, with 2,151 reported in 2009/10 compared with 2,225 in 2008/09 - a fall of only one per cent.

Geoff Cox, HSE's Head of Manufacturing, including waste and recycling said:

"We are encouraged that there have been fewer deaths and injuries in waste and recycling, but the injury rate, which is stubbornly consistent with that of the previous year, paints a stark picture of how much more needs to be done. We also cannot view fewer deaths this year being any indication of a downward trend. The industry cannot afford to be complacent."

Employers warned about explosion risks from cutting of drums and containers

Employees contemplating 'hot work' on used containers, and managers overseeing it, are being urged to check that the correct working procedures are followed after two people were killed in separate incidents in North East Scotland whilst cutting up drums.

'Hot work' includes any process that generates a source of ignition, such as naked flames, heat or sparks arising from working methods such as welding, flame cutting, grinding and using disc cutters.

HSE is  issuing a Safety Alert to remind duty holders of the risk of explosion when undertaking 'hot work' on containers that contain, or have contained, flammable or combustible substances like waste thinners, new or used engine oil, anti-freeze, solvents, petrol or diesel fuel.

The use of these materials is widespread across industries such as Engineering, Manufacturing, Motor Vehicle Repair and Agriculture, and although some containers may appear to be empty, sufficient liquid residue can exist in seams, creases or folds in the container to give rise to explosive vapours.

Even where the contents of a container may not have been classified as flammable under normal conditions, hot work can generate such extreme temperatures that the contents may ignite.

HSE Principal Inspector Edward Marshall, comments;

"This alert is not issuing new guidance but is to ensure all relevant workers are aware and familiar with the comprehensive advice that already exists.  In many cases hot work may not actually be necessary, and those ultimately responsible for the work should consider safer alternatives, such as the disposal of drums rather than the repair, and the use of cold-cutting techniques or cold repair methods.  If there is no alternative employers should aim to avoid the risks, by using specialist companies, or reduce them using methods such as gas-freeing, cleaning or inerting before starting hot work."

Ed - There are three types of bulletin:

Alert - immediate and crucial

Notice - not immediate but within a defined timescale

Other information - any other information that HSE comes across through its normal activities that needs to be passed on either to a wide audience, or to a specific group or sector of industry

Bishop urges employers to take health and safety seriously

The Bishop of Liverpool has urged employers to take health and safety seriously or risk putting workers' lives in danger.

On a fact-finding visit to the HSE's headquarters in Bootle, the Right Reverend James Jones heard about the toll of workplace illness and injuries.

Last year 151 people were killed while at work in Britain, and more than 100,000 suffered serious injuries. The Bishop of Liverpool met HSE staff at its offices on Merton Road to find out about the work taking place to reduce deaths and injuries in the future.

Bishop James said:

"We should not forget the reason why health and safety exists in the first place - to protect lives.  Life is a glorious gift. The most terrible tragedy in all this is that so many of the deaths that occur in the workplace are entirely preventable - hundreds of lives are being lost and thousands of people seriously hurt because of basic failings.  Safety at work is more than just a legal issue - it is a moral one too."

Judith Hackitt, the HSE Chair, said:

"I'm delighted that the Bishop of Liverpool has shown such a keen interest in health and safety, and has been so vocal about the importance of preventing work-related death and injury.  In Merseyside alone, we have seen several prosecutions recently as a result of people being killed or suffering major injures in the course of doing their job. If those responsible for managing workplace risks had followed some basic health and safety principles then these injuries could have been prevented.  Earlier this year, we unveiled a permanent memorial at our headquarters for the hundreds of workers who have been killed or seriously injured. It acts as a reminder to our staff of the importance of the job they do every day - and the ongoing need to educate employers about managing work-related risks sensibly and proportionately."

The Right Reverend James Jones paid his respects at the Workers' Memorial as part of his tour of HSE's headquarters in Bootle. The memorial was created by Liverpool artist Andrew Small and features the inscription 'Remember the Dead; Protect the Living'

1010BRN.pdf (1,023.79 kb)

Enterprise Inns sentenced following landlord's death

Enterprise Inns has been fined £300,000 after a landlord died from carbon monoxide poisoning, and tenants at another 474 pubs were put at risk.

Paul Lee was found unconscious by a cleaner at the Aintree Hotel on Aintree Road in Bootle just after midday on 12 November 2007. He had turned on a gas fire in his living room ten hours earlier before falling asleep.

The 41-year-old suffered a heart attack due to lack of oxygen on the way to the hospital and died the following morning without regaining consciousness. He had worked as the tenant landlord at the pub for less than a month.  The owner of the Aintree Hotel, Enterprise Inns plc, was prosecuted after an HSE investigation found that the fire may not have been serviced since 1979 and the chimney was completely blocked.

The West Midlands based company, which owns approximately 7,700 pubs across the UK and has an annual turnover of £818 million, admitted breaching s3(1) HSWA.

Liverpool Crown Court heard that Enterprise Inns should have ensured that gas safety inspections were carried out at 868 of its pubs at least every 12 months, but that only 394 had valid certificates. The gas heater which caused Mr Lee's death should have been checked before he took over the tenancy.

Enterprise Inns also received a written warning from HSE in 2001, following a fire at one of its properties in Birmingham, which highlighted a systematic failure to implement annual gas safety checks.

Iain Evans, the investigating inspector at HSE, said:

"It is shocking that a major pub chain failed to ensure regular gas safety checks were carried out at more than 400 of its properties. As a result, one man has been killed and hundreds of other lives have been put at risk.  Tests we carried out on the gas fire at the Aintree Hotel showed that the workplace limit for exposure to carbon monoxide would have been exceeded within five minutes of it being turned on, and would have reached a level known to be fatal within an hour.  The chimney from the fire was completely blocked so there was nowhere for the carbon monoxide to escape. Instead, it gradually built up in the room and starved Mr Lee's organs of oxygen until he was left unconscious.  What makes this case so tragic is that Mr Lee's life could have been saved if Enterprise Inns had continued to obey the written warning it received about gas safety six years earlier, instead of falling back into old habits."

Enterprise Inns plc, of Monkspath Hall Road in Solihull was ordered to pay £19,000 towards the cost of the prosecution in addition to the fine.  

Veolia fined following fatality

Veolia ES (UK) Ltd has been fined £225,000 after a worker was killed in a collision with a vehicle whilst collecting litter from a busy road.

The prosecution follows an investigation by the HSE after an incident on 2 March 2007 in East Peckham, Kent.

Damian Griffiths, 20, an agency worker for Veolia, was litter-picking on a grass verge of the A228 with a colleague, who was driving a caged vehicle, used to collect the litter, alongside him.  A large goods lorry travelling in the same direction collided with the caged vehicle, shunting it into Mr Griffiths. The LGV driver escaped serious injury but Mr Griffiths died at the scene.

Veolia ES (UK) Ltd, of Pentonville Road, London, was found guilty of breaching sections 2(1) and 3(1) of the HSWA. It was also ordered to pay costs of £95,239.

Following sentencing, HSE Inspector Caroline Penwill, said:

"Veolia failed to ensure Mr Griffiths' work activity was safe and properly planned. As a result of its failure a man has died. This has had devastating consequences for Damian Griffiths' family.  Litter-picking near busy roads can be a high-risk activity if not properly planned. Veolia was responsible for managing these works, but in this case did not properly protect the roadside crew from oncoming traffic.  Other road users were also put at risk. This is unacceptable. Those responsible for managing roadside jobs must ensure that safe systems of work are in place, and measures are taken to safeguard workers and members of the public."

Ed - The waste and recycling industry have a poor accident rate with a fatal injury rate well above other recognisably high-risk industries like construction and agriculture.

 

£120,000 fine following death

A Durham company, Hargreaves (UK) Services Ltd, has been fined £120,000 at Grimsby Crown Court after safety failings led to the death of a man at its coal processing plant in Immingham.  The company was also ordered to pay £35,000 in costs.

The prosecution followed the death of Alan Noddle, who suffered fatal injuries when he was run over by a loading shovel on 20 July 2007.

Mr Noddle worked as a maintenance fitter for Hargreaves' sister company, Norec Ltd, and was working at the Hargreaves' Astra Site at Immingham Docks on the day of the fatal incident.

He died when he was struck by a large loading shovel being used to transfer coal from one area of the plant to another. The driver of the vehicle could not see Mr Noddle as he walked across the stockyard because the large bucket on the loading shovel blocked his view.

After the hearing HSE Inspector Geoffrey Clark said:

"This is a tragic case where a man died as a result of dangerous practices at the site. The loading shovel severely obscured the driver's view, yet despite this it was common practice for employees to be allowed to walk in the area where these machines were being operated.  Workplace transport is one of HSE's priorities, as transport injuries are a major cause of death and injury in the workplace. Although this is an extreme case, I would urge all employers to be aware of the dangers of moving vehicles of all sizes and to put appropriate measures in place to segregate people from moving vehicles to prevent another tragedy from happening."

Death in roadworks

Sean Hale from Cwmbran, was hit by a car whilst crossing the carriageway of the M4 near Cardiff to collect traffic cones from the central reservation during road resurfacing of the motorway in 2006.  An HSE investigation found Mr Hale's employers, R P Traffic Management Ltd, failed to ensure that a safe system of work was in place that included the use of appropriate signs to warn drivers that workmen were on the carriageway at the time.

The court heard that Mr Hale was working with a colleague at around 9.30pm on 8 September 2006 when the incident happened.

As trainees, both men were being supervised at the time but the quality of supervision was called into question. The court heard both men were observed crossing the carriageway in a dangerous manner on a number of occasions on the same night.  R P Traffic Management Ltd, of Factory Road, Newport pleaded guilty to failing to ensure the safety of two trainee traffic management operatives under Section 2(1) of the Health & Safety at Work Act 1974. It was fined £100,000 and ordered to pay £22,000 costs.

The company installs and remove signage, cones and other materials to manage the flow and speed of traffic when construction works and other activities take place on roads.

HSE inspector Wayne Williams said:

"On the night in question, the gang of three workers consisted of one foreman and two trainees. This was not adequate supervision in what is a high risk working environment.   Trainee roadworkers should always be under a high level of supervision when undertaking this kind of work as part of an overall safe system of work on the job.  Everyone involved in work on high speed roads should learn from this tragedy and consider whether they are doing enough to prevent needless deaths and injuries. Motorway works can be very dangerous places unless a high degree of control is maintained.  Advanced warning signs should always be used when people are working on motorway roadworks to alert drivers that people may be in the road and exercise caution as they approach."

Construction firms fined following worker's death

Two Lancashire companies have been sentenced following the death of a construction worker.

The HSE prosecuted Howorth Scaffolding Services Ltd and Glenmill Group (Developments) Ltd after Peter Walton fell 5m from scaffolding on Altham Industrial Estate, Sykeside Drive on 10 May 2006.

The 55-year-old had been working on a project to build three new office blocks when he fell.  Preston Crown Court heard that Mr Walton was critically injured when an unsecured board on the scaffolding gave way.  He died five weeks later in hospital.

His widow, Christine Walton, said:

"It has been four long, stressful years since the incident that eventually took Peter's life. He meant everything to me and I will love, miss and mourn him for the rest of my life.  I know that the conclusion of this prosecution won't bring him back but it will help to give me some sort of closure, and to bring this type of incident to the forefront. Sadly Peter's death is just one of many needless deaths that occur in the construction industry due to slack adherence to health and safety regulations.  Hopefully what happened to Peter, and is still happening on construction sites, will make people realise that health and safety laws are there to protect us and are not to be scorned and scoffed at."

Howorth Scaffolding Services Ltd and Glenmill Group (Developments) Ltd  both pleaded guilty to breaching s3(1) HSWA by putting workers at risk.

Howorth Scaffolding, of Accrington Road in Hapton, was fined £25,000 was ordered to pay £13,793 toward the cost of the prosecution. Glenmill Group, of Turner Road, Lomeshaye Business Village in Nelson, was ordered to pay a nominal fine of £1 with costs of £13,793 toward costs. The judge said the fines reflect the companies' current financial situations.

HSE Inspector Ian Connor said:

"Both these companies contributed to Peter Walton's death by failing to follow the proper safety procedures for putting up scaffolding.  Howorth Scaffolding should have made sure that it constructed the scaffolding properly. And, as the principal contractor for the site, Glenmill Group should have ensured it was safe before allowing construction workers onto it.  This is an extremely sad case which once again shows how important it is to follow health and safety regulations. It's vital that construction companies do more to prevent deaths and injuries in the future."

Failure to guard

The owner of a Bristol lighting company has been fined £20,000 after an employee was injured by machinery that was not properly guarded.

Darren Wring, trading as Fineline, based in Clevedon Road, Failand, North Somerset, pleaded guilty to breaching regulation 11(1) PUWER at Weston-super-Mare Magistrates Court. He was also ordered to pay costs of £1,800.  Rolf Weber sustained minor head injuries on 5 February 2010, after going into the working area of the machine to remove a finished work piece and inadvertently hitting his head on the cutter which was still rotating at full speed.

Christine Haberfield, HSE Inspector said:

"Fortunately, Mr Weber's injuries were fairly minor, but the cutter on which he hit his head was rotating at 18,000rpm and he could have been very seriously injured or even killed.  It is vital that dangerous machinery is properly safeguarded. In this case, the cutting area should have been enclosed with doors that were linked to the operation of the machine to prevent anybody going into the danger area while the machine was running. People can help prevent similar incidents by checking machinery safeguards regularly, to make sure that they are still working correctly."

Scarred for life

A Kent-based construction and engineering company has been fined after an employee suffered severe burns when his jack hammer touched unexposed underground electricity cables.

Bradley Marsh, 28, from Ashford suffered 62 per cent burns to his upper body, face, neck and arms when he inadvertently struck the 11,000 volt cable while working at a construction site in Tovil, Maidstone.  An investigation by the HSE found Mr Marsh's employer, Dwyer Engineering Services Ltd, was in breach of a number of safety regulations after the incident at Burial Ground Lane, on 12 June 2009.

Maidstone Magistrates Court heard the firm did not have a capable supervisor on site, which contributed to poor practices being commonplace. There was also no suitable system in place for the identification of underground cables.

Additionally, Mr Marsh was not trained to dig within 500mm of the live cables, a factor which led to the electrical explosion.

Dwyer Engineering Services Ltd, of Shottenden Manor Farm in Ashford, Kent, earlier pleaded guilty to breaching reg 25(1) Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007.  The company was fined £20,000 and was also ordered to pay costs of £14,532.

Mr Marsh was hospitalised for six weeks after the incident, and as a result of his injuries cannot expose himself to direct sunlight, due to skin grafts. His house has been adapted so he can sleep downstairs and he is unlikely to work again.

HSE Inspector, David Fussell, said:

"This incident was wholly avoidable and demonstrates the need for site safety in the construction sector, especially as contact with live electricity is a common cause of serious incidents. In this case, the employer failed to assess the risks to the operator who was digging in close proximity to 11,000 volt electrical cables.  The fact that serious injury or death can result from contact with electricity, either via personnel, machinery or vehicles, makes it all the more essential for employers to have safe working procedures for any work involving electrical plant, cabling or equipment.  If Dwyer Engineering Services Ltd had been prepared to spend a little time locating underground services, using signs, maps, and locating devices, then this incident would have been avoided."

Head teacher fined after pupil injured

A Merseyside head teacher has been fined £20,000 after one of his students suffered permanent injuries when he fell through the school roof.  The HSE prosecuted John Summerfield, 63, after he led a group of teenagers onto a roof at Sacred Heart Catholic College on Liverpool Road in Crosby.  He was found guilty of a health and safety offence following a trial at Liverpool Crown Court. The court heard that Mr Summerfield had taken the group onto the roof on 14 August 2008 on the day of their A Level results.

One of the 18-year-old students, who has asked not to be named, fractured his skull, broke his ribs, perforated an eardrum and suffered permanent damage to his right eye when he fell 2.5 metres through a roof light.

Mr Summerfield, now retired, of Moorland Avenue in Crosby, was found guilty of breaching Section 7(a) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 by failing to protect the safety of his students when he decided to allow them onto the roof.  He was ordered to pay £22,708 towards the cost of the prosecution, in addition to the fine, on 29 October 2010.

Mike Sebastian, HSE Principal Inspector in Merseyside, said:

"John Summerfield wanted to show his students a part of the school they had never seen but it left one of them suffering a permanent injury to his eye.  The roof was kept out of bounds for a reason. As the headteacher, Mr Summerfield should have thought about the possible consequences before deciding to take them through two locked doors onto the roof.  Students should expect to be in a safe environment when they're at school and look to their teachers for guidance on what is and what isn't safe. Sadly, a pupil suffered serious injuries because of the poor judgement of his headteacher, and is unlikely to ever fully recover."

Risk to hearing brings a fine

A Burnley manufacturing company has been fined £16,000 after it ignored a formal warning about noise levels at its factory.

The HSE prosecuted Equestrian Surfaces Ltd for putting its employees' hearing at risk, despite being given two extensions to an Improvement Notice requiring a reduction in their daily noise exposure levels.

Staff at the factory on Phoenix Way, which makes flooring surfaces for horse riding centres, were required to work for several hours a day near a granulator machine as loud as a chainsaw. The machine uses metal blades to shred material into tiny pieces and can reach volumes up to at 98 decibels.

Burnley Magistrates' Court heard that the company failed to put any practical measures in place to reduce workers' exposure to noise, even after receiving an Improvement Notice and being given advice from a specialist HSE inspector.

A further HSE visit with an independent scientist showed that, although some changes had been made, the employees' daily noise exposure remained high and the changes fell short of what could and should have been achieved.

HSE Inspector Matthew Lea said:

"This prosecution highlights the responsibilities that employers have to looking after their employees.  Noise-induced hearing loss is a degenerative condition and the ear cannot repair itself. It's therefore important that employers take these dangers seriously as there is no going back once hearing is damaged.  The Control of Noise at Work Regulations require employers to put measures in place to ensure that their employees can work safely, without putting their hearing at risk.  Equestrian Surfaces could have taken a number of simple practical steps to reduce noise exposure but chose instead to rely on just using basic ear protectors, which in effect is the last line of defence."

Equestrian Surfaces Ltd pleaded guilty to breaching Section 33(1)(g) HSWA for failing to comply with an Improvement Notice. The manufacturer was also ordered to pay £11,000 towards the cost of the prosecution.

 Printing firm fined after employees injure hands

An Essex company has been fined after two employees had their hands crushed by printing presses within months of each other.

Basildon Magistrates' Court heard how the workers at the printers and binders Wyndeham Heron Ltd in Maldon, Essex, had been working with machines, when their hands became trapped.  On 27 March 2009, Press Assistant Paul Howard, 49, from Colchester, fractured his thumb when he tried to clear a paper jam in the stacker unit of a press at the company's site.

Later the same year, on 18 November, Mark Frost, 46, from Brightlingsea, was working on another press when a problem was experienced with the drive belts of a conveyer. The moving parts were unguarded and it had become common practice for employees to use objects, or their hands, to deal with conveyer belt problems. Whilst attempting to remedy the problem, Mr Frost hand became caught in the belts and was forced against a roller crushing his fingers.

The investigation and prosecution by the HSE found a lack of training, supervision and appropriate equipment, and that there had been no assessment on how to carry out the work safely in either case.

Wyndeham Heron, of Colchester Road, Heybridge, Maldon, CM9 4NW, appeared at Chelmsford Magistrates' Court yesterday and admitted two charges of breaching s2(1) HSWA.

The company was fined £15,000 with £2,490 costs for the charge relating to Mr Frost's injury and a further £10,000 with £3,171 costs in relation to Mr Howard's injury.

HSE inspector, Paul Grover, said:

"Incidents like this are entirely preventable.  Printing presses are a potentially very dangerous piece of equipment, which require adequate guards and safe working procedures for dealing with every kind of operational occurrence. It is not good enough to rely on ad hoc practices to clear paper jams and to deal with other mechanical failures.  Employers must ensure that appropriate training, supervision and equipment are provided. A suitable and sufficient risk assessment must also be carried out.  Advice and guidance is available and easily accessible to help duty holders comply with the law and keep people safe. Where appropriate, HSE will not hesitate to take action against employers failing to comply with the law."

Company fined for endangering workers

A pizza manufacturer in Hounslow has been prosecuted for endangering workers after ignoring calls to make safe an unprotected and dangerous first floor doorway.

Capri Foods Ltd, of Worton Hall Industrial Estate, Worton Road, Isleworth, failed to act on an Improvement Notice served by the HSE despite a continuous risk of a serious fall from height.

City of London Magistrates heard the doorway, which stood approximately 4m above the ground, was used to load and unload goods from a forklift truck operating in a yard outside. However, it was kept open even when the forklift was parked up, with nothing in place in terms of railings or barriers to stop employees falling through it and onto the concrete below.

HSE flagged the hazard during a visit to the factory on 29 July 2009, serving a notice that required improvements to be made by 1 November 2009.  A follow-up visit on 9 December 2009 showed nothing had changed, with an HSE inspector observing an employee leaning out of the doorway to empty a bowl of water.

Capri Foods Ltd, pleaded guilty to a breaching the Improvement Notice and a breach of the Work at Height Regulations 2005 in connection to the non-compliance. The company was fined £15,000 and ordered to pay £2,607 in costs.

After the hearing HSE inspector Steve Kirton commented:

"Falls from height remain one of the biggest dangers in the workplace, accounting for a fifth of all deaths and scores of serious injuries in the food manufacturing sector alone according to our latest official figures.  So it's incredibly frustrating to see a company like Capri Foods blatantly ignoring calls to protect employees when such a clear and obvious risk has been identified. Fortunately no-one was hurt on this occasion, but the consequences of falling through that door could have been horrific."

Steel girder plummets through estate agents

A steel company has been fined £15,000 after a 4m long metal girder crashed through the roof of a Preston estate agents, narrowly missing two office workers.

The steel beam fell about 25m from a crane and smashed through the roof and three floors of Garside Waddingham estate agents in Fleet Street on 16 January 2010.

Pocklington Steel Structures Ltd was prosecuted by the HSE following an investigation into what caused the 80 kg to fall from the crane.

Preston Magistrates' Court heard that two female employees were working in the ground floor shop when the incident happened. The girder was one of 18 similar steel beams to be lifted by the crane that morning on a construction site for a new hotel on Fox Street in Preston.

The company had spent the morning lifting girders at a 45-degree angle to fit into the new hotel structure. But HSE found that nothing was done to stop the girders slipping through the chains wrapped around them.

The investigation concluded the beams should have been lifted when level and not at an angle. Pocklington Steel should also have ensured the girders could not slip out of the chains by attaching shackles in holes drilled through them, as they were being lifted near to the public and other buildings.

Anthony Polec, the investigating inspector at HSE, said:

"It must have been terrifying for the staff on duty in the estate agents that day when they suddenly heard and then saw a steel girder crashing down next to their desks, right where the public normally stand.  It was only by chance that the incident happened on a Saturday when fewer staff were at work, and that no members of the public were in the building at the time. For such a high lift, near to people on the ground, it is simply not good enough to wrap chains around girders, in a so-called choke hitch, without securing them.  Two office workers had a lucky escape but several people could easily have been killed. It's vital construction companies make sure they use cranes safely to prevent similar incidents happening again."

Pocklington Steel Structures Ltd, of Lancaster Road, Carnaby, East Yorkshire, admitted breaching s3(1) HSWA.  It was also ordered to pay £6,706 towards the cost of the prosecution in addition to the fine.

Fencing firm prosecuted for putting workers in danger

A Manchester fencing manufacturer has admitted putting its employees in danger by allowing them to use unguarded machinery.

Fencing Supplies Ltd was prosecuted by the HSE after the company allowed guards to be disabled on nine fence cutting machines at its factory on Mellors Road in Trafford Park.

When an HSE inspector visited the site on 23 July 2009, he served nine Prohibition Notices banning the use of the machines and an Improvement Notice requiring changes to working practices.

Trafford Magistrates' Court heard that the guards on five machines had been deliberately bypassed. This meant that workers could gain access them whilst they were still operating, to carry out maintenance work and remove waste materials.

Mike Lisle, the investigating inspector at HSE, said:

"The machines should have automatically shut down before anyone was able to get close to the dangerous parts of the machinery.  But as a result of the guards being defeated, the machines continued to operate with workers at risk of coming into contact with moving parts and suffering serious injury.  Missing or defective guards on machinery are a common cause of injury in the manufacturing sector. It is only by chance that no one was seriously injured in this case."

Fencing Supplies Ltd pleaded guilty to breaching reg 11(1) PUWER 1998 by failing to prevent access to dangerous parts of machinery.

The company was fined £14,000 and ordered to pay £2,774 towards the cost of the prosecution on 9 October.

Hospital fined after health worker infected with Hepatitis C

A healthcare worker at a Worcestershire hospital contracted the Hepatitis C virus after injuring herself on a needle used to take blood from an infected patient.  During the HSE prosecution of Worcestershire Acute Hospitals NHS Trust over the February 2007 incident, City Magistrates heard the worker, who had been training at the Trust for three weeks, was instructed to take blood from a patient known to be infected with the virus.

After taking the sample, she had difficulty reaching the sharps bin to dispose of the needle, because other equipment surrounding the patient prevented access for her trolley.

Blood continued to seep through the patient's dressing, so the worker placed the used needle on to the nearest work surface while she attended, but as she reached for a tissue to further dress the wound, she caught her wrist on the needle.

The HSE investigation found the employee was not made aware of the patient's infection status until after the injury occurred and was not supervised during the procedure. Despite action to counter infection from the injury, she was subsequently diagnosed with symptoms of the virus.

An examination of the Trust's system for taking blood samples from high-risk patients found failures to carry out suitable risk assessments where there was a risk of exposure to blood-borne viruses.

The Trust also failed to implement adequate controls or provide training around them, and lacked suitable arrangements for effective monitoring and review of safe working practices. HSE issued four improvement notices in May 2008 to address these issues, which the Trust subsequently complied with.

The Trust pleaded guilty to breaching s2(1) HSWA and reg 6 Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations 2002 and was fined a total of £12,500 and ordered to pay £9,000 costs.

HSE inspector Jan Willets said:

"For staff regularly taking blood from patients, the risk of infection with the Hepatitis C virus from a contaminated needle is greater than for any other blood-borne virus.  This infection was entirely preventable. The risks and controls are well known and the Trust should have had an effective safe system of work in place.  It should have ensured an inexperienced healthcare worker was appropriately supervised, aware of the risks to her health from her work with this patient and the precautions to be taken.  There are lessons for other Trusts who should check they have appropriate arrangements in place including identification of high-risk patients, using sharps disposal containers at the point of use, adequate supervision and training systems, and an implemented policy on the use of safer needles, devices and gloves."

Huddersfield firm fined for endangering workforce

A man was left with serious injuries after a fall from an unguarded platform, a court heard during the sentencing of a Huddersfield textile retailer.  Fifty-seven year-old Dennis Hunter, of Barnsley, was left with a broken leg and crushed ankle when he fell eight feet onto concrete while dismantling shelving at Phoenox Textiles' site in Spring Grove Mills, Clayton West.

Huddersfield based Phoenox Textiles was prosecuted after an investigation by the HSE found the men were working unsupervised and had received no training to dismantle the 30-feet-high shelving system safely.

The men had not been given any specialist equipment to enable them to work safely at height. Ladders supplied were not suitable for the work nor secured in any way.

Huddersfield magistrates heard Mr. Hunter was on a lower rack while cutting through boarding with a circular saw. The board tipped and sent him crashing to the floor, breaking his leg.

The heavy board then fell on top of him crushing his left ankle and badly bruising his face. Mr Hunter underwent two operations and was in plaster for seven weeks before he was able to return to work part time.

Following the incident, HSE served an Improvement Notice ordering Phoenox to properly assess risks to staff while working at height and implement suitable controls. A Prohibition Notice was also served halting any further dismantling work on other poorly-maintained racking at the site.

Phoenox Textiles Ltd., which employs 45 staff across two sites, pleaded guilty to breaching s2(1) HSWA.  The firm was fined £12,000 and ordered to pay £3,056 costs.

After the case, Inspector Jackie Ferguson said:

"Six workers were put at risk during the dismantling of this racking - they had absolutely no protection against falls from working at heights of up to 30 feet.  Mr Hunter was fortunate not to have suffered even worse injuries, and to date remains unable to fully bear weight on his injured leg.  Falls from height remain the biggest cause of workplace deaths and one of the main causes of injury. Working at height without the right equipment, training or systems is wholly unacceptable and extremely dangerous. HSE will not hesitate to prosecute when companies commit serious offences and put their workers' lives in danger."

Company fined £12,000 after injuries to three workers

A Chichester rubber hose manufacturer has been fined £12,000 after three workers were injured on its premises over two months.

Oldham Seals Limited, of City Gates, Chichester in West Sussex, appeared at Chichester Magistrates Court after pleading guilty to breaching s2(1) HSWA. The company was fined £12,000 and ordered to pay costs of £4,151.25.

The court heard that on 6th May 2009, a hose builder was unwinding a fabric bandage that had been wrapped around a hose mounted on a rotating machine part called a lathe, while it was moving. The bandage wound round his left hand pulling it into the machine. It was tight enough to amputate his thumb and partially removing part of his index finger.

The HSE investigation showed that a further two incidents had taken place on this machine prior to this incident. A different worker had his glove entangled in the machine and he was pulled towards the rotating parts. He suffered bruising and cuts to his torso.

A third worker was winding a rope around a hose he was building on a lathe when his leg was caught and he was pulled towards the machine. The rope snapped but he suffered severe lacerations to his left leg.

The investigation highlighted that the incidents were preventable, as had there been suitable guarding round the moving parts then the risk of entanglement would not have been present.

HSE Inspector, Michelle Taylor said:

"These three incidents are terrible and all because the company did not have simple guards to cover the moving parts of the machine and prevent entanglement. Also, the company should have made an assessment of the practical measures which could have controlled the risks. Had they done so, then these dreadful incidents would have been prevented."

Construction firm fined after death of worker

A Scottish construction firm has been fined after one of its workers died four weeks after being struck by a telehandler driven by a co-worker.

Charles Wilkinson, 51, from Berwick, was struck by the telehandler as it was being reversed the wrong way along a one-way residential street in Tweedmouth.

Newcastle Crown Court heard the company, James Swinton Co Ltd, was carrying out refurbishment work in the street on 10 November 2008.

The company had not requested a road closure from Berwick District Council and there were still residents' cars parked in the street.

The telehandler driver was reversing his vehicle up the street the wrong way when it mounted the pavement and struck Mr Wilkinson, who was taken to hospital with injuries to his pelvis, spine and ribs but later released.  However, Mr Wilkinson died four weeks later as a result of a blood clot. A Home Office pathologist later determined the clot was caused by the incident.

The company, James Swinton Co Ltd, of Noble Place, Hawick, Scotland, had pleaded guilty at an earlier hearing to one breach of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 and was fined £10,000 and ordered to pay £4,063 costs.

After the case, HSE Inspector Dr Dave Shallow, said:

"This was a tragic accident that could and should have been avoided.  Site transport activities should be managed to minimise as far as possible the need for reversing. But where it is necessary to reverse, site managers should ensure that it is done in a safe and controlled manner, using a banksman, reversing aids on the vehicles and segregation of pedestrians and vehicles.

"The company could have asked Berwick District Council for a road closure which, along with these measures and the removal of residents' vehicles, would have allowed safer movement of construction plant and vehicles."

Worker suffers crush injuries

A Rochdale engineering company has been fined after a two-tonne piece of machinery fell onto a labourer, leaving him with multiple fractures.  Carter International was prosecuted by the HSE after the 21-year-old was crushed when the machine part toppled from a forklift truck onto his legs.

The company, which is based at the Fieldhouse Industrial Estate, just off Whitworth Road, refurbishes machines for the plastic and rubber industries. The worker, who asked not to be named, was preparing to clean a section of machinery when it fell on him on 17 September 2009.

Trafford Magistrates' Court heard that the two-metre-long machine part knocked the worker to the ground, breaking his collar bone and causing multiple fractures to his legs. He had to wear a cast for several months after the incident and was not able to return to work for ten months.

The HSE investigation found that the bolts used to hold the machine part on the forklift truck were not designed for the job.

Inspectors also found that lifting machinery at the site had not been properly checked by Carter International, despite the company receiving an improvement notice from HSE in 2005, which required it to have its lifting equipment properly inspected. While it had complied with the original notice, investigating inspectors found the company had not had the machinery checked frequently enough.

The company also failed to have proper lifting processes in place, with individual employees often having to decide how to carry out particular jobs.

HSE inspector David Norton said:

"This was a really nasty incident and the worker is lucky to have escaped much more serious injury.  It is vital that companies where workers routinely lift very heavy objects not only provide the right equipment, but also have proper processes in place and plan each job properly to prevent these types of incidents."

Carter International Ltd admitted breaching s2(1) HSWA by failing to ensure the safety of their staff during lifting operations. The company was fined £10,000 and ordered to pay £4,184 costs.

Last year, there were 32 deaths and more than 22,400 serious injuries in the construction industry in the UK.

North Yorkshire farmer prosecuted after worker loses limb

A hired farm worker's leg had to be amputated after he attempted to clear a blockage on a harvesting machine whilst the blades were still rotating.  The man from Whitby was employed to help cut forage maize at Skipsters Hagg Farm at Appleton-le-Moors, near Pickering, on 9 November 2009.

The HSE prosecuted Peter Turnbull, a partner in family-run farming firm GR Turnbull & Sons, after investigating the incident.

Scarborough Magistrates Court heard the worker was driving a silage trailer while Peter Turnbull was driving the forage harvester in the same field.  When a blockage occurred in the cutting disc of the harvester, Peter Turnbull attempted to clear the blockage by reversing the drive mechanism. When that failed, he left his seat to clear it by hand, leaving the machine running.  The hired worker came to assist but whilst in the process of clearing the blockage the man's leg was caught in the harvester's rotating cutting discs. The resulting injury was so serious that, paramedics including an Air Ambulance crew, made a decision to amputate the limb at the scene.

Peter Turnbull of Grange Farm, Sinnington, near York, was prosecuted by the HSE for a breach of the Provision and Use of Work Regulations 1998 for allowing someone under his control to enter a danger zone while dangerous parts were still operating. He pleaded guilty to the charge and was fined £10,000 and ordered to pay £1,698 in costs.

After the hearing HSE inspector Charlie Callis said:

"Incidents of this kind are all too common in the farming industry, and the outcomes are inevitably equally horrific.  Farmers are under pressure to bring in the crop and time spent shutting down and making safe a machine may, incorrectly, be considered time wasted. Taking unnecessary risks like this is never a sensible option, and Mr Turnbull could and should have done more to mitigate those risks.  HSE is working hard to reduce deaths, injuries and ill health in agriculture, but we need farmers, farm owners and workers to do their bit by following basic safety guidelines and implementing safe working procedures at all times."

Ed - Farming is now officially the UK's most dangerous industry on a ratio of deaths and injury per size of workforce.

Worker snaps wrist after glove tangled in drill

A Cardiff manufacturing firm has been fined after a worker broke his wrist when his glove became entangled in an unguarded drill.  The HSE prosecuted Elmatic (Cardiff) Ltd following the incident at its factory in Wentloog Road, Rumney on 11 March 2009.

Cardiff Magistrates' Court heard that 21-year-old employee Lee Baker had been asked to drill holes in metal boxes despite not usually working with the drill and having no formal training on how to use it.  The pillar drill Mr Baker was using did not have an appropriate guard fitted and when positioning one of the components for drilling his glove became tangled. He fractured his wrist in two places and needed to have plates inserted.

HSE had previously taken formal action against the company, in 2002 and 2009, to ensure that drills were adequately guarded.

Elmatic (Cardiff) Ltd, registered to Wyndham Crescent, Canton, Cardiff, pleaded guilty to a charge under Regulation 11 of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998. They were fined £8,000 and ordered to pay £6,691.45 costs.

HSE inspector Hugh Emment said:

"HSE has warned this company before about not providing suitable guards on drills of this type, and while they did initially heed these warnings, the safety standards were not maintained.  Mr Baker had not been trained to use this drill, nor had he been told about the dangers of wearing gloves while using drills. This is a well known risk in the manufacturing industry, and it resulted in a serious injury to Mr Baker."

In March 2002, Elmatic (Cardiff) Ltd received an immediate prohibition notice relating to the use and guarding of three pillar drills, and this was followed by written advice from an HSE inspector. During the investigation in to the incident on 11 March 2009 the company received an immediate prohibition notice, on 24 April 2009, for failures relating to guarding on a pillar drill and deficiencies in operator training.

Lancashire couple in court after repeated injuries

A Lancashire couple has been prosecuted after an employee was seriously injured twice in less than two months at a pine furniture workshop in Bacup.  Simon Davies, from Bacup, was cutting a small groove into a pine door on 13 July 2009 when it shot out of the machine, forcing his left hand onto a rotating blade. The 21-year-old's index finger was badly cut, most of his nail was removed and the bone was broken.

The HSE prosecuted Kenneth Bramhall and Gill Brown, who run Village Pine on Newchurch Road in Bacup, for failing to provide suitable training for employees, and for not adequately controlling the risk to workers of being injured.  Reedley Magistrates' Court in Burnley heard that, just three weeks before the July incident, HSE had issued seven enforcement notices after Mr Davies suffered similar injuries from a circular saw.

The notices required specific improvements to be made at the workshop, and work on the unguarded and unsafe saw to be stopped completely.

Michael Mullen, the investigating inspector at HSE, said:

"It is regrettable that a worker was badly injured twice in less than two months because basic health and safety measures were not in place. Mr Davies has now left the joinery profession as a result of the injuries he suffered.  We had no other choice but to prosecute following the second incident, which could easily have been prevented. A simple jig should have been used to handle the wood, keeping the operator's hands away from the blade. Blocks of wood should also have been fitted to the front and back of the machine to deflect the wood if it shot out.

"Sadly, the standard of training needed to do this type of work safely had not been provided. If the measures required by health and safety law had been taken then Mr Davies would not have been injured in this way."

Kenneth Bramhall, 51, and Gill Brown, 65, both pleaded guilty to breaching Regulations 9(1) and 12 of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 and were each fined £6,000. They were also both ordered to pay £1,000 in compensation to Mr Davies, and £2,000 each towards prosecution costs. 

Ed - The woodworking industry has one of the highest injury rates in the manufacturing sector, with most caused by contact with moving machinery. Details on improving safety are available at www.hse.gov.uk/woodworking.

Other health and safety offences in brief

Defendants	Offences	Penalty	Description
Smurfitt Kappa UK Ltd	Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992 Reg 17	£5,000 + £4,204 costs	Work place injury – interaction of pedestrian with vehicles and conveyor – broken ribs caused
Wates Construction Ltd Dean Lotwick	Construction (Design and Management) regulations 2007 Regulation 28(2)	£4,000 + £5,273 costs   £4,000 + £6,963 costs	Failure to design and construct hoarding properly which  blew down in wind
Simon Jones Restoration and Re-design Limited	Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007 Regulation 28(1)	£4,000 + £3,000 costs	Gable wall collapsed onto workers through failure to plan works effectively
Graham Salter	Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 Regulation 11(1)	£4,000 + £1,622 costs	Failure to guard dangerous parts of machinery – injury caused
Furber Roofing Ltd	Work at Height Regulations 2005, Regulation 6(3) and of the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 Regulation 3(1)	£2,000 + £1,500 costs	Working at height without appropriate protection and failure to undertake suitable and sufficient risk assessment
Ductwork Environmental Services Ltd	Employers' Liability Compulsory Insurance Act 1969 s1(1)	£1,000 + £750 costs	Failure to have current employers’ liability insurance.
General All Purpose (GAP) Plastics Ltd	Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 reg 11	£1,000 + £4,000 costs	Failure to guard – injuries caused when arm dragged into machine

 

 

Environment Agency offences

Skip hire company illegally burnt waste and buried asbestos

The operators of a North Devon scrapyard and skip hire company have been found guilty of illegally burning and burying waste including asbestos at a site near Bideford in a case brought by the EA.

After a five day trial at Exeter Crown Court, Petra Bond and Julian Goddard of Auto Disposals and Bideford Skip Hire were convicted of a total of seven offences under the Environmental Protection Act 1990 and Environmental Permitting Regulations 2010.

A jury heard how in 2006 there were a series of fires the site that damaged a large asbestos-clad shed and pile of mixed waste. Petra Bond, who was in control of the site at the time, instructed an employee to remove the asbestos from the building. He placed it in a number of skips, one of which was later legitimately removed by a waste disposal company.

Following the last fire, Petra Bond is alleged to have told the same employee to get rid of the fire-damaged wastes as quickly as possible to ‘cut costs.’ She instructed him to take it to an adjoining property, Goodleigh Cottage, excavate a hole and bury it in an area just behind a wall.

A second consignment of asbestos, stored on several pallets, was buried in a corner of the waste transfer station to allow a car park to be constructed. Once again, this was done on the instruction of Petra Bond. It is estimated the damaged shed contained around 15 tonnes of bonded asbestos of which only 1.8 tonnes could be accounted for by Petra Bond.

Witnesses including three former employees, told the court how later in 2007 Bideford Skip Hire supplied skips to a business premises in Torrington where sand was used to mop up a diesel spillage. The skips were later stored in a car park at Goodleigh Cottage where they started leaking diesel.

Petra Bond told workers at the site to dig a hole and bury the diesel contaminated waste. When an employee asked why she wouldn’t dispose of it legitimately, Bond said it was ‘too expensive.’ A couple of skips of mixed waste were also buried at the same time.

Also in 2007, Petra Bond instructed site staff to move and bury a large pile of mixed waste within the waste transfer site. In early 2008 site operations were taken over by Purgamentum Waste Management Ltd with both Petra Bond and Julian Goddard as directors of the company.

In May 2008 an Agency officer visited the site an found an incinerator called an Air Curtain Burner being used. Julian Goddard had been previously advised by an environment protection officer at Torridge District Council that it was an offence to operate this type of burner without a permit.

The Agency officer instructed site workers to stop burning material. He saw treated, painted and mixed wood was being burnt along with general mixed waste.

The court heard how the defendants had denied the EA access to the site on a number of occasions during the investigation and had been unhelpful and obstructive. Eventually the Agency used its powers under the Section 108 of the Environment Act 1995 to enter the site. A magistrate’s warrant was issued and on May 29, 2008 a team of Agency officers gained access and carried out a full site investigation. Further excavations under a court warrant were undertaken in March 2009.

Large quantities of waste including asbestos and mixed waste was found exactly where the former employees said it would be found. In one area, a liquid described as a ‘malodorous leachate’ was discovered as waste was being excavated.

A witness told the court he estimated between 2,000 – 3,000 tonnes of waste had been illegally buried at the site and in the grounds of a neighbouring property.

‘The operators of this site deliberately chose to flout the law and dispose of hazardous waste in a highly illegal and irresponsible fashion. They were motivated by money and a desire to increase profits and save on costs. In behaving in this reckless manner they ignored the concerns of their employees and put human health and the environment at risk,’ said Richard Cloke for the Environment Agency.

Ed – given the extraordinary nature of this case, and indeed the following matter, I have chosen to report them this month even though the court has not yet passed sentence in either matter.

Paper company found guilty of falsifying environmental data

The UK's largest waste paper recycling company has been convicted of misleading the EA over the quality of effluent discharged from its papermill into a Devon river.

A technical manager at St Regis Paper Co Ltd was also found guilty of falsifying records at the end of a six day trial at Exeter Crown Court.

The company operates a papermill at Higher Kings Mill, Cullompton under a Pollution Prevention and Control permit issued by the Environment Agency. The permit contained a condition that the company monitors its own effluent treatment plant and reports the results to the Agency.

In 2004, the Agency informed St Regis Paper that stricter controls on effluent quality were due to come into force in early 2005 and asked the company to provide a timetable of improvements to its effluent treatment plant to ensure it complied with the new discharge limits.

The company said it had made inquiries with a firm of effluent treatment specialists and been advised the cost of improvements to its treatment system at Higher Kings Mill could be as high as £1.2 million. The company asked for extra time to put an upgrade into effect and stated that in the meantime it planned to install an aeration system in an attempt to improve the quality of effluent discharged into the River Culm.

In early 2005 the company told the Agency the aeration trial using the oxygenation equipment had achieved ‘positive results’ and no longer needed the extra time.

However, the Agency noticed that a number of the effluent quality results for a period between 2005 - 2007 submitted by St Regis Paper were ‘suspiciously close’ to the permitted limits. In March 2008 an officer asked to see the company’s daily environmental records sheets and noticed that one had been altered from a value (100mg/l) in excess of the limit to just below the permitted maximum of 60mg/l.

When an officer later asked to see copies of the 2007 record sheets he was told it was not possible because they ‘had been destroyed.’ An effluent sample taken by the Environment Agency on March 6, 2008 had a Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) level two and a half times above the permitted limit.

A jury heard that a freshwater dilution system was installed to dilute effluent with river water before it reached the sampling point. This dilution system was not brought to the attention of the Agency which was unaware of its existence.

St Regis Paper Co Ltd is part of DS Smith PLC, an international company making packaging materials and office products. The parent company has annual turnover of £2 billion with a gross profit of £109 million. Higher Kings Mill makes coloured card for office and educational markets. St Regis Paper Co Ltd is the largest recycler of waste paper in the UK.
                                                                                                                         
‘The deliberate falsifying of records strikes at the cornerstone of our permitting system that is based on self monitoring by the Operator. By presenting the performance of its effluent treatment plant as being better than it was, the company saved a considerable amount of money by not having to carry out major improvement works,’ said Spence Seaman for the Agency.

‘This case sends out a strong message to the business community and should deter others from falsifying environmental data. Allowing companies to self monitor involves trust. If a business fails to keep its side of the bargain the Environment Agency will take action,’ said Mr Seaman.

The trial ended on 18 October with St Regis Paper Co Ltd and the company’s technical manager, Christopher Steer, being found guilty of falsifying environmental monitoring data and concealing illegal discharges from the Environment Agency in contravention of the PPC Regulations 2000.

The case against Mr Steer was adjourned for sentencing until November 29, 2010. The case against St Regis Paper Co Ltd was adjourned until April 2011 following the Environment Agency’s decision to make a Proceeds of Crime Application.

Bicycle company pedals into packaging problems

A Nottingham based importer and wholesaler of bicycles, Universal Cycles Limited has been fined £34,000 for failing to recycle packaging

The company pleaded guilty at Nottingham Magistrates’ Court to 34 charges under the Packaging Regulations. In addition, the company was ordered to pay £4,394 in costs, along with a £9,140 in compensation.

The company should have been registered with the EA and was obliged to recover and recycle a portion of its packaging waste, as well as filing a certificate at the end of each year to confirm it had met these obligations.

However, the company did not register with a compliance scheme until 2009.

The court heard a routine check by the EA in November 2009 established that the company should have been registered in previous years.

Jill Crawford, prosecuting for the Environment Agency, said the company’s explanation for failing to comply with the Packaging Waste Regulations was that it was “unaware” that it was an obligated company under the regulations.

By failing to register, the company had avoided fees and other costs of £47,941.

In mitigation, the court heard that the company had entered an early guilty and had cooperated with the investigation. In addition, the company is now fully compliant.

Ed - The charges were brought by the Environment Agency under the Producer Responsibility Obligations (Packaging Waste) Regulations 1997 and 2005, and the Environment Act 1995.

Producer responsibility is an extension of the “polluter pays” principle.  The regulations apply to companies which (1) manufacture or fill packaging, or sell or import packaged goods; (2) have an annual turnover exceeding £2 million; and (3) handle more than 50 tonnes of packaging per year.

Car parts company fined for packaging offences

A seller and importer of imported car parts was ordered to pay a total of £41,776 after failing to register as a producer of packaging waste, and recover and recycle packaging waste.

Euro Car Parts Ltd of Euro House, Fulton Road, Wembley Industrial Estate, Wembley, Middlesex HA9 0TF pleaded guilty at Brent Magistrates’ Court to failing to register with the Environment Agency or a compliance scheme as a producer of packaging waste, and failing to meet its requirements to recover and recycle packaging waste between 1998 and 2008. 

The company was fined £28,240, and was ordered to pay £4,381 in costs.  The company was also ordered to pay compensation of £9,140 to the Environment Agency for unpaid registration fees for the years 1998 to 2008 inclusive, and the victim surcharge of £15.

The court heard that it failed to register with the Environment Agency or a compliance scheme and provide evidence that it recovered and recycled the packaging waste it handled, including paper, plastic, steel and wood.

The EA contacted the company as part of its routine monitoring of non-regulated businesses requesting information about the packaging material it handled. The information provided showed that the company should be registered as a producer of packaging waste as it met both thresholds by handing more than 50 tonnes of packaging per year, with an annual turnover of more than £2 million (£5 million for 1997 and 1999).

By not registering and not contributing to recovery and recycling, it was estimated that Euro Car Parts Ltd made a saving of approximately £29,129.35, of which £19,989.35 would have helped the recycling industry.

Environment officer Dawn Dorman said: “Although these regulations have been in force since 1997 we continue to find companies who are unaware of their responsibilities, by meeting the required obligated thresholds.  The money that Euro Car Parks Ltd has saved by not purchasing packaging recovery notes would have directly supported the recycling industry.”

Water company fined for polluting Cornish stream

South West Water has been ordered to pay nearly £20,000 in fines and costs for discharging poor quality sewage effluent into a tributary near Bude in Cornwall.

On March 27, 2009 the Agency carried out an annual inspection of the Launcells Sewage Treatment Works near the village of Grimscott. Officers discovered signs of poor maintenance including sewage fungus in an inspection chamber, pipe and filter bed outlet.

Sewage fungus was also seen growing in the receiving watercourse for a distance of approximately 170m to the Grimscott Stream. In places the sewage fungus was as thick as a ‘shag pile carpet.’  Agency officers could also smell sewage as they walked through nearby woods. 

As a result, the Sewage Treatment Works failed its inspection. A re-inspection took place in April 2009 and the works passed.  However, the court heard it only passed because a South West Water worker had manually removed sewage fungus from the watercourse using a brush (a process known as ‘masking’) prior to the re-inspection. The Agency was only told of this 18 months later when South West Water prepared its report for the magistrates.

The site was visited on a further four occasions. On each occasion sewage fungus was seen in the watercourse leading to the Grimscott Stream.  An invertebrate survey conducted by the Agency showed the health of the stream had deteriorated as a result of the pollution.

Sewage fungus was seen again during an annual inspection of the works on April 30, 2010.  The site failed this inspection and its re-inspection. Sewage fungus is often associated with sewage treatment plants that are not providing full secondary biological treatment and those considered to be overloaded or badly maintained.

The court heard the tributary and stream ran through Leigh Woods, a County Wildlife Site and that an area adjacent to the tributary leading to the stream was being used as a children’s den. There is no indication any children have been harmed.

Unlike large sewage treatment works that must comply with numeric discharge consents, small works like Launcells serving populations of less than 250 operate under a ‘descriptive consent’ and are not required to meet numeric standards for discharged effluent. Instead, they must be operated and maintained in such a way as to ensure any effluent they discharge does not have an adverse impact on the environment. 

In all, Launcells had caused pollution of the watercourse on eight separate occasions since March 2009 in breach of its consent.

‘It is important small sewage treatment works are operated properly and fully comply with the conditions of their consent. It became evident this treatment works had been discharging poor quality effluent into surrounding watercourses on a continuous drip-drip basis over a period of time. The pollution was caused by poor maintenance,’ said Alison Gidlow for the Environment Agency.

South West Water, of Peninsula House, Rydon Way, Exeter was fined £12,000 and ordered to pay £7,747.63 costs after pleading guilty to two breaches of their discharge consent in that the treated effluent discharged from Launcells (Grimscott) Sewage Treatment Works had an adverse environmental impact on the receiving controlled waters contrary to Section 85(6) of the Water Resources Act 1991. The case was heard by Bodmin magistrates on Tuesday 5 October 2010.

Fine for firm who polluted River Ogden

Recontainers Limited of Haslingden has pleaded guilty to illegally releasing waste water into Swinnel Brook and the River Ogden which caused serious water pollution, killing hundreds of fish and damaging the environment. They have been fined £10,000 and ordered to pay £3,407.

Rossendale Magistrates Court heard that on 21 April 2010, the EA was contacted by a member of the public about reports of dead fish on the River Ogden. Subsequent investigations found a serious water pollution incident had occurred as a result of a release of waste water containing detergents, disinfectants, soaps and chlorinated products from cleaning out containers at the company’s premises.

The waste water should have been pumped into a container prior to treatment and discharge to foul sewer, however, a pump had become detached and the washings had overflowed into the site’s sewerage system.  The investigation established there was a blockage and a crack in the sewer, and the washings had escaped and entered Swinnel Brook and the River Ogden.

The waste water was highly polluting and rapidly stripped oxygen from the watercourse resulting in major damage to fish and macro-invertebrate and damaging the ecology of the river. The company were unaware of the incident and the devastation they had caused until they were contacted by the Environment Agency.

The company admitted it had no system in place to check that its pumping arrangement was working correctly or whether there were any blockages in the site’s private foul sewer. 

Simon Crozier, Environment Agency Environment Officer, said: “Recontainers Limited were negligent in their failure to have a system in place to check that their pumping arrangement was working correctly, and this resulted in a category one incident in terms of its seriousness where more than a 3.5 km stretch of watercourse was affected.”

The main sightings of dead fish were in the River Ogden from Sunnybank Road up to and including Swinnel Brook and the overall count of dead brown trout was 164 ranging in size from five centimetres to twenty five centimetres with a further 87 sticklebacks.

A survey carried out on 23 April 2010 found clear evidence of pollution downstream of the company, where water samples showed reduced animal life compared to sites upstream.

RIVAR fined for breaching permit conditions

RIVAR Limited, a Berkshire property company, has been ordered to pay more than £20,500 for breaching its consent to discharge treated sewage into a Thatcham stream.

The company pleaded guilty to three charges of breaking the conditions of its discharge permit which resulted in harmful quantities of sewage entering the  Dunston Stream.

West Berkshire Magistrates’ Court fined the company £3,000 on each for three charges of breaching Section 85 of the Water Resources Act 1991  and ordered it to pay £11,500 costs as well as  an additional victim surcharge  of £15.

The court heard that the company failed to monitor and manage sewage treatment works at its site, leading to poor effluent quality. This impacted dramatically on downstream water quality, habitats and the environment as it flowed through front gardens of residents, past a school and through two parks in a residential area. This endangered the well-being of the local people using these facilities as well as having a detrimental effect on the water quality.  

The Environment Agency granted RIVAR Ltd consent to discharge treated sewage from a mixture of residential and office properties. The discharge permit was based on a number of conditions, which are to mitigate the polluting effect of the discharge in the Dunston Stream. It sets levels for water quality parameters, such as solids, ammonia and biochemcial oxygen demand, which can all be measured in effluent. RIVAR Ltd also had to operate and maintain the sewage treatment works to keep the effluent within the consent limits so as to prevent pollution of the Dunston Stream.

Water samples were taken of the Dunston Stream by Environment Agency officers in October 2007. These showed that  Biological Oxygen Demand (BOD) concentrations were 15 times over the consent limit, Ammoniacal Nitrogen levels were five times over the limit and the suspended solids were double.  Further samples taken downstream of the sewage plant found four times the BOD limits , and Ammoniacal Nitrogen levels 37 times higher.

Failure of the sewage treatment works appears to have been caused earlier by exceptional flooding in July 2007 which damaged electrical isolators causing the pumps to fail.

RIVAR Ltd were helpful during the investigation, removing the effluent and repairing the sewage treatment works. However, further samples taken in May 2008 and June 2009  found water sample levels to be over the consent limits .

Between September 2007 and September 2009 the Environment Agency hotline received several reports of pollution incidents relating to the sewage treatment works. Environment Agency Officers responded by attending the site to monitor the situation and take samples.

The sewage discharges were not only unsightly but it also affected the nearby resident’s peaceful enjoyment of their properties. There is a special needs school within 10 m of the stream and a park where children have open access to. The Dunston stream through which the discharge runs eventually joins the River Kennet which is a designated Site of Special Scientific Interest( SSSI). The Dunston stream before the discharges started always had a clear water with a gravel bed inhabited by frogs, newts and toads.There is also a pond into which it flows which supports a wide range of flora, and fauna including frogs, newts and toads.

Investigating Officer Alison Love said:

“RIVAR failed to inform us within the agreed period of 28 days before starting the discharge, which was in contravention of the agreed conditions. This meant we were unable to collect samples of the discharge to check it met the consent effluent quality conditions. If the breach in the discharge permit had been identified earlier, the water quality in Dunston Stream may not have been as severely affected.
We work closely with farmers, businesses, water companies and the public to reduce pollution and improve water quality, but when companies like RIVAR fail to adequately monitor their operations thereby resulting in harm to the environment  we will take strong action.”                                                     

Slurry allowed to run into Black Dyke

Ronald Duguid, trading as Adam M Duguid and Son at Home Farm, Spittal in the Street, was fined a total of £8,000 and ordered to pay full costs of £6,425 by Lincoln Magistrates Court.

Miss Claire Bentley, prosecuting for the EA, told the court that Duguid, aged 69, had intentionally allowed slurry from his farmyard and leaking manure heaps to discharge into the Black Dyke.  She added that there were no systems in place to store and collect dirty water or slurry and the current system was wholly inadequate.

When asked by Officers, Duguid acknowledged that the effluent was running into the watercourse but ‘could not see a problem with the pollution’. He told them he had occupied the site for the past 55 years and ran the business in partnership with his son. Drains from the yard and the water used to clean the milk tanks had always discharged into the stream.

An EA monitoring officer discovered the problem on 4 November 2009 when he noticed a strong smell of manure in the stream.  The following day, other officers visited the site and saw the slurry and dirty water flowing into the stream from a discharge pipe coming from Home Farm.  They noticed that upstream from the pipe the water appeared clear, but downstream it was opaque and was clearly polluted.

On 11 November, Environment Agency Officer, Rebecca Baxter returned to the site with a biologist colleague to carry out a biological survey.  The stretch of watercourse affected was in a protected zone where there was an abstraction point for drinking water.  It was at this time that Miss Baxter saw slurry seeping out of a containing wall surrounding a manure heap and running into the watercourse.

The survey later indicated that 150m downstream of the pipe the water quality was very poor and did not return to a good state until after the water had passed through a series of lakes and a reed bed, however the quality of the drinking water had not been affected.

The biologist concluded that the pollution from the pipe had a severe detrimental impact on the invertebrates in the stream as well as causing the water to become deoxygenated and grow a layer of sewage fungus on river vegetation.

A letter was sent to the partnership, advising that  the discharges were polluting the stream and must be stopped immediately. Duguid responded by stating that they ‘could not see any economic solution and they were causing no overall problem’.

When Miss Baxter returned to the site in March 2010  to carry out a further inspection, she saw a second, larger manure heap and a farm building housing livestock both seeping slurry into a chamber which then discharged into the stream.  The wall surrounding the smaller manure heap was still in need of urgent repair.

Duguid told EA officers that there was ‘no area for the storage of dirty water on the farm’ and although he acknowledged the biological impact the pollution had on the watercourse, he could not see a problem as it only affected a short length of the stream.  He also assumed that the leakages coming from the manure heap would be absorbed by the surrounding land.

In mitigation Mr Patrick Cordingley, solicitor for the defence, said Duguid has invested in new systems to prevent future pollution.

After the hearing Miss Baxter said “Farm owners must responsibly manage any pollution risk from their operations. Slurry can severely pollute water and must not be allowed to enter local rivers or streams. Proper slurry stores should be constructed and regularly maintained to prevent pollution.
 
“We would prefer to work with people and businesses to ensure that this type of pollution does not occur. If they don't approach us then they run the risk of legal action and costly fines.”

Kiddicare fined for failing to join recycling scheme

Baby and nursery partnership trading as Kiddicare in Peterborough has been fined £6,000 and ordered to pay £1,335 costs for failing to sign up to a recyling scheme.

Elaine Weavers-Wright, a partner of Kiddicare, pleaded guilty at Peterborough Magistrates’ Court to breaching packaging waste regulations for two years.

Mrs Anne-Lise McDonald prosecuting for the Environment Agency told the court that the failure of the business to register came to light through a routine enquiry when the business admitted to not being aware of regulations.

Magistrates were told that businesses which handled in excess of 50 tonnes of packaging a year and had an annual turnover of more than £2m were obliged to register either with a scheme or directly with the Environment Agency.

Mrs McDonald told the court: “The aim of the packaging regulations is to achieve a more sustainable approach to dealing with packaging by ensuring businesses take responsibility for the packaging used in their operations. This in turn reduces the amount of packaging produced and the amount going to landfill.”

Magistrates were told that for each year of not being registered there were three offences: not being registered, failing to recover and recycle packaging and not providing a record of recycling.

Weavers-Wright pleaded guilty to failing to register a scheme during 2007 and 2008 and asked for three similar offences to be taken into consideration relating to 2006. The business joined a scheme in 2009.

Mrs McDonald said the business had saved £3,896 between 2006-8 by not being registered.

Neil Guest representing Mrs Weavers-Wright said Kiddicare was of good character and had never had any issues with compliance previously.

After the hearing Environment Agency officer Rachel Parker said: “Packaging regulations are designed to prevent today’s packaging becoming tomorrows landfill. The money raised from compliance with this legislation goes directly into the recycling industry which means that more packaging waste can be recycled.

“By not complying with these regulations Kiddicare has not made its contribution towards recycling. Today's result shows that we will actively seek to find and prosecute businesses who do not comply with these important regulations.”

Southern Water count the cost of sewage pollution

The EA has prosecuted Southern Water for causing untreated sewage to enter a tributary of the internationally important River Itchen at Eastleigh in Hampshire during June last year.

Southern Water Services Ltd appeared at New Forest Magistrates Court on Wednesday 27 October 2010 and pleaded guilty to the offence. The company was fined £5,000, ordered to pay costs of £3,440 and £15 victim surcharge.

The Court heard that at 3.30pm on 16 June 2009, Southern Water contacted the EA to report that the rising main at the outlet of the Chestnut Avenue Pumping Station had burst inside the site compound, but this incident was not causing pollution. The company also informed the Environment Agency that four tankers that they deployed were removing sewage while the pumps were switched off to enable repairs to take place.

At 8.35am the next day, Southern Water again contacted the Agency to alert them that from 7.10am that morning, untreated sewage had been entering the Monks Brook at Eastleigh via an overflow pipe.

The overflow pipe must only be used in the event of storm conditions or when there has been an electrical failure, and neither situation had taken place. Southern Water are also required to report discharges of sewage immediately, but it took the company over an hour to notify the Environment Agency of the incident.

Southern Water continued to use tankers to take the effluent away from the site but this action proved insufficient to prevent the continued overflow. Finally, the company deployed additional tankers to an inspection chamber in nearby Passfield Avenue and blocked the outfall into the Monks Brook. The discharge of sewage to the brook eventually stopped at 2pm that day, nearly seven hours after the incident began.

The Monks Brook is a tributary of the River Itchen, an internationally important conservation site that is well known for its wild populations of salmon and sea trout. A biological survey of the watercourse was carried out and the results showed that oxygen levels in the brook 600m downstream of the discharge of sewage were between 24 to 28 per cent as opposed to 97 per cent upstream.

The levels of ammonia recorded in the water were six times the fatal level for fish and aquatic life. A further survey concluded that the incident may have had an impact on wild trout populations in brook.

Gareth Bates of the Environment Agency said: “Prosecution is usually a last resort for us but it was clear that Southern Water’s emergency plans were inadequate in response to this serious incident.

“Any pollution to the natural environment must be avoided, or stopped as soon as possible if it does occur. Southern Water clearly failed to do this as untreated sewage was allowed to enter the brook for a period of nearly seven hours. As a result a totally avoidable pollution of an environmentally sensitive area occurred.”

Fuel company fined for polluting River Clyst

Fuel distributor GB Oils has been fined £5,000 for polluting a tributary of the River Clyst near Dart Business Park, Clyst St George, near Exeter, Devon, with red diesel.

On 24 July, 2009, a significant quantity of red diesel was seen in the watercourse. Booms and pads were put across the tributary to contain the pollution and the Environment Agency used more than 100 filled sandbags for construction of a weir to contain diesel.

Further investigation traced the leak to fuel distributor GB Oils, trading as OJ Williams. The company was not showing any loss of oil on their computer system. However, a pressure test and ground excavation revealed a hole in a supply pipe to a fuel dispensing island.

A quantity of oil entered the watercourse but the majority was contained in a 100 metre section. The River Clyst is a SSSI (site of special scientific interest), a SPA (special protection area) and a RAMSAR site (a wetland site with international importance).

The magistrates court recognised the work undertaken by the company to remediate the environmental impact of the spillage.

‘We believe that 22,000 litres of red diesel had been lost to the ground near the fuel island. An accurate fuel measuring system within storage tanks and leak detection on pipe work would have alerted the company early on and avoided a major oil spill,’ said Mischka Hewins for the Environment Agency.

GB Oils Ltd (trading as OJ Williams) of Dart Business Park, Clyst St George, Exeter, were fined £5,000 and ordered to pay £3,700 costs after admitting causing polluting matter, namely oil, to enter controlled water contrary to Section 85(1) of the Water Resources Act 1991.

Microwave mountain

A scrap metal dealer has been fined for illegally storing and dismantling thousands of old microwave ovens on an industrial unit in North Yorkshire.

At Scarborough Magistrates’ Court, James Stephen Pearson admitted running his waste business at Hunmanby Industrial Estate between October 2008 and January 2010 without the necessary environmental permit.

Craig Burman, prosecuting for the Agency, said an environment officer visited Pearson’s locked site in May 2009 and observed several hundred microwave ovens stored on the ground, as well as other waste.

Officers attended the site the following month with police and estimated about 3,300 scrap microwaves were being stored there. Many had been opened up, exposing electrical wires, and other scrap metal was stored nearby.

In interview, Pearson told environment officers the site and ovens were his and he was storing the microwaves until the price of scrap metal increased. He had no planning permission for his waste operation.

Pearson was advised he needed an environmental permit and should cease activity until he obtained one. He was later given the same advice on several subsequent occasions.

The court heard that later in June environment officers returned, to see a fence had been built around the microwaves, and they wrote to Pearson, advising him of the legal requirement for a permit for storing and processing electrical waste.

Over the next month, Mr Burman said environment officers made a number of visits to the site between June and September and saw evidence of ongoing waste activities on site.

The officers began surveillance in September 2009 and recorded vehicle movements and waste, including scrap microwaves, arriving at and leaving the site.

Waste activities continued at the site during November and December and when environment officers returned in January 2010 they saw broken microwave plates over the boundary, as well as vacuum cleaner parts, a fridge freezer, sunbed, TVs, tyres, copper wiring and more microwave components.

Pearson was interviewed that day at Scarborough police station and waste transfer notes were seized and analysed by officers for information on Pearson’s movement of waste.

Mr Burman said officers who analysed Pearson’s waste records found he had been paid £10,227 for scrap received during 2009.

The court heard any processing or dismantling of electric or electronic waste had to take place indoors and to ensure goods were not exposed to the elements.

Magistrates found that the deliberate nature of Pearson’s offending and the financial motivation were aggravating features, as was the length of time it continued in the face of information and advice from the Environment Agency.

Pearson, 50, of Airy Hill, Filey, North Yorkshire, was fined £5,000 and was ordered to pay full prosecution costs of £2,547.59 and a victim surcharge of £15.

The bench gave him credit for an early guilty plea and his lack of previous environmental offences, as well as the fact that there was no evidence that Pearson’s actions had caused any environmental harm.

 Other environmental offences in brief

Defendants	Offences	Penalty	Description
Horatio Charalambous	Environmental Protection Act 1990 s33 x2	£2,200 + £2,452 costs	Garage owner fined for dumping waste at a recycling centre
Thames Water Utilities Limited	Water Resources Act 1991 s85	£2,500 + £8,000 costs	Polluting a watercourse – burst drinking water causing silting over 2.5km
Steven Haim	£2,500 + £400 costs	Control of Pollution Act (Amendment Act) 1989 s1	Failure to register as a waste carrier
Alan Lee	£2,000 + £1,225 costs	Control of Pollution Act (Amendment Act) 1989 s1	Failure to register as a waste carrier
Campbell Environmental Services Ltd	£1,000 + £1,452 costs	Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2007 reg13	Operating a waste facility without being authorised with a permit
Preva Produce Ltd	£1,050 + £1,515 costs	Producer Responsibility Obligations (Packaging Waste) Regulations 2007 reg40(1)(a),(b)&(c)	Failure to register for a recycling scheme, failure to recover and recycle packaging and failure to record recycling

 

Maritime and Coastguard Agency matters

A.P. Moller-Maersk A/S prosecuted re rest periods

At a hearing at Newcastle Magistrates Court, the owners of the UK registered container ship Maersk Patras pleaded guilty to eight charges of failing to provide adequate hours of rest for the crew and one charge of failing to improve the situation.

In September 2009, the MCA conducted an audit on board the Maersk Patras at Bremerhaven.  It was noticed that the Captain, Officers and other crew members had not been having the required periods of rest as laid down by international agreements.

The company, A.P. Moller-Maersk A/S of Denmark, were informed of these concerns but failed to correct matters and the breaches of the regulations continued. On the 25th January 2010, the MCA issued the company with an Improvement Notice which required them to rectify the position by the 28th February 2010. They also failed to comply with that notice.

A.P.Moller-Maersk were fined £18,500 plus costs of £4,439.27

Neil Atkinson, Marine Surveyor, Maritime and Coastguard Agency said:

“Fatigue is often a significant factor in accidents, whether it is to individuals or to the ship itself. For this reason the MCA are focusing on seafarers hours of rest during routine inspections of UK and foreign flag vessels. This conviction should send a strong message to the industry that failing to provide adequate hours of rest for the crew is not acceptable.”

Graham Duff, prosecuting on behalf of the MCA said in court:

“The hours of rest regulations are not just a bureaucratic exercise, they are all about safety. It should go without saying that fatigue, particularly for decision makers on board large vessels, is a very real enemy and presents a significant risk to the safety of others.”

Collision leads to prosecution for breach of Colregs

At a hearing at Folkestone Magistrates Court, the owners and Officer of the Watch (OOW) of a UK Registered fishing vessel pleaded guilty to several offences following a collision in the Vlieland Straits Traffic Separation Scheme on the 8th December 2008.

FV Hendrik

In the early hours of Monday 8th December 2008 the UK registered fishing
vessel Hendrik Sr was travelling within the Traffic Separation Scheme off Vieland (Netherlands) in international waters. The Hendrik Sr was travelling across the TSS while a Finish registered cargo vessel, Birka Exporter, was travelling in the correct direction within the TSS.  The Birka Exporter was on the starboard side of the Hendrik Sr.

Under the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea (Colregs), the Hendrik Sr was obliged to give way to the cargo vessel and had the primary responsibility for avoiding a collision. A collision ensued at about 06.30 hours with considerable damage being caused to
both vessels. There were no fatalities or injuries on either vessel. At the time of the collision visibility was good. The Hendrik Sr was later declared a Total Constructive Loss and has since been scrapped.

An investigation was started by the Enforcement Unit of the Maritime and Coastguard Agency. The owners, skipper and OOW were interviewed by the Dutch Police at the request of the MCA under Mutual Legal Assistance legislation. No explanation has been given for the collision or its causes.

The owners of the Hendrik Sr, Willem and Jacob Brands of Urk, Netherlands were fined a total of £1,000 after pleading guilty to four charges for breaching Colregs.

The OOW, Riekelt Brands of Urk, Netherlands, pleaded guilty to four breaches of Colregs and one charge brought under Section 58 Merchant Shipping Act for endangering his vessel and its crew. He was fined £3,500.

The Magistrates made a cost order of £9,328.50 against the three defendants.

Mr. David Fuller, Principal Fishing Vessel Surveyor for the MCA Eastern Region said:

“The MCA regards strict compliance with the Colregs as extremely important for ensuring the safety of all at sea. This collision would indicate that even the most basic standards of compliance were not met. It was most fortunate that no one was killed or injured. The MCA would like to thank the Dutch Coastguard and Dutch National Police for their assistance in this matter.”

Failure to declare dangerous goods

On Friday 30th April 2010 at Dover, Mr Sebastien Filipowicz aged 33 and Mr Piotr Jakobek aged 36, both Polish nationals, were stopped for a routine Customs check at Dover Ferry Port after arriving on the NorfolkLine ferry Maersk Dover from Dunkerque.

During the search by Customs Officers it was noted that that some of the boxes were labelled with dangerous goods placards but the vehicle was not. Further investigation by the MCA Enforcement Unit revealed that although the drivers had the correct paperwork for the dangerous goods they had not presented it to the ferry company when boarding the ferry at Dunkerque.

Because of this the ferry was unaware of the exact nature of the load and it was not stowed in accordance with the safety requirements set out in the International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code nor were the Captain and crew aware of the dangerous nature of the cargo and potential risk to the 272 crew and passengers on board at the time.

Both drivers were charged with contravening the Merchant Shipping (Dangerous Goods and Marine Pollutant) Regulations 1997 for failing to declare the dangerous goods .

On Monday 11 October 2010 at Canterbury Crown Court both Mr Filipowicz and Mr Jakobek pleaded guilty to the offences.

Her Honour Judge Williams said:

“The court takes the issue of public safety on cross channel ferries very seriously indeed. The fault that each of you failed to do was to identify a dangerous load that should have been identified at Dunkirk when seeking to board. The necessity of identifying the load is so that the ferry company can allocate an appropriate area within the vessel for the load to be stowed. The load was airbags destined for Land Rover. You have both pleaded guilty and are both of good character. I will be merciful. You will both be sentenced to a conditional discharge for a period of two years. If you commit a crime within the United Kingdom within that period, and particularly if you commit a similar crime to this one, the court will deal with you seriously. You must each pay a contribution towards costs. The contribution is £1,500 each to be paid within the next 6 months.”

Captain Eric Meare, Nautical Surveyor at the Dover Marine Office, Maritime and Coastguard Agency said:

“The importance of correctly declaring your cargo and in particular dangerous goods when checking in at the ferry terminal cannot be overstated in order to allow the correct stowage of the vehicle within the ship and the safe procedure for the crew to deal with it in the event of an incident on board.”

Policy and Updates

Health and Safety figures

New figures released confirm that Britain has the lowest rate of fatal occupational injuries in Europe and one of the lowest levels of work-related ill health.

The statistics published by the HSE show that in Britain between April 2009 and March 2010:

·     There were 152 workers fatally injured - down from 179 the previous year. This is the lowest level on record in Britain, with 0.5 deaths per 100,000 workers.

·     There were 26,061 major injuries, such as amputations and burns, to employees - a rate of 101.5 per 100,000 - compared with 27,894 in 2008/09.

·     There were 95,369 injuries serious enough to keep people off work for three or more days - a rate of 371.5 per 100,000 - down from 105,261 the previous year.

·     An estimated 1.3 million people said they were suffering from an illness caused or made worse by their work, up from 1.2 million in 2008/09. Of this, 555,000 of these were new illnesses occurring in-year.

·     A further 800,000 former workers claim they are still suffering from an illness caused or made worse by work.

Judith Hackitt, Chair of HSE said:

"It is encouraging to see further reduction in the number of people being killed and seriously injured at work. We now need to ensure that the improvements which are being made continue. Every statistic represents an individual or a family which is now suffering as a result of health and safety failings at work.  Britain remains one of the safest places to work in the EU and we are rightly proud of this record. The challenge now is to focus on those areas where improvement is slow to emerge.  We know what good practice looks like but there remain significant areas of poor practice which still result in serious harm to people at work. These statistics also remind us yet again of the significant gains which are yet to be made in reducing the harm caused to people's health by work."

The construction and agricultural industries continue to report the highest levels of work-related injuries and ill-health, with disproportionately high numbers of incidents.

The toll of injury and ill-health resulted in 28.5 million working days being lost, an average of 1.2 days per worker - 23.4 million to ill-health and 5.1 million to injury.

HSE continues to take a tough line with employers who put workers at risk of injury or illness. It issued 9,734 enforcement notices requiring firms to stop dangerous activities or make improvements to the way they manage safety. It also took court action against the 1,026 most serious offences.

Double-award for 'Make the promise' agriculture campaign

An HSE campaign aimed at reducing the disproportionately high rate of death and injuries in agriculture has picked up two prizes at the PR Week Awards, considered to be the 'Oscars' of the PR world.

'Make the promise. Come home safe' which encourages farmers to make the pledge to return home safely for themselves, their families and their livelihoods, won the award for the Public Sector PR Campaign of the Year, before going on to claim the prestigious Campaign of the Year award. This is given to the best public relations project across private, public and third sectors in the last 12 months.

One of the judging panel described the campaign theme as 'an idea of genius', saying that it 'turned a hard-to-articulate issue into something human...'

30,000 farmers have signed up to the campaign so far and one of its notable successes has been the high profile support from the NFU, the National Federation of Young Farmers' Clubs and Co-operative Farms, amongst others, who are helping take the campaign forward.

HSE Board member and agriculture champion, Sandy Blair, collected the awards on behalf of HSE at the event in London:

"I am extremely proud to have accepted these awards not only on behalf of HSE, but all the other individuals and organisations who have helped make it such a success from concept through to delivery such as Weber Shandwick, COI News and PR and the National Federation of Young Farmers' Clubs.  Most particularly I wish to acknowledge and thank those farmers and their families who have been prepared to share their personal tragedies in the interests of preventing others.  These awards themselves will no doubt generate additional publicity for the campaign and that can only be a good thing."

HSE welcomes Lord Young's report on health and safety

The HSE has stated that it warmly welcomed the publication of Lord Young's report into health and safety.

Judith Hackitt, the HSE Chair, said:

"Lord Young's report is an important milestone on the road to recovery for the reputation of real health and safety. HSE welcomes it and will be actively pursuing those recommendations within our remit.  We welcomed the review when it was announced by the Prime Minister in June and we are looking forward to contributing to its implementation.  Publication of the report is a tremendous opportunity to refocus health and safety on what it is really about - managing workplace risks. Getting this right is good for employers, employees and Britain as a whole.  We've been saying for some time that health and safety is being used by too many people as a convenient excuse to hide behind. Often it is invoked to disguise somebody's motives - concerns over costs or complexity, an unwillingness to defend an unpopular decision or simple laziness. Lord Young is sweeping these excuses away.  HSE will continue to champion a sensible and proportionate approach to dealing with serious risks in the workplace - not eliminating every minor risk from everyday life."

'20-minute' risk assessment for low risk offices

A new online risk assessment will help cut back the time it takes to weigh up the hazards in offices to just 20 minutes.

The HSE has produced the web tool to help employers to consider relevant hazards in their office and think about how they control them to keep staff safe. The tool is said to help avoiding unnecessary paperwork and bureaucracy for office-based businesses, which tend to be low risk.

Safety officials will take account of the results of the assessments when they carry out inspections - evidence that businesses have taken appropriate steps to manage workplace risk.

Judith Hackitt, the HSE chair, said:

"Many people assume that risk assessments need to be long, formal documents covering every hazard, no matter how minor or unlikely to occur. That's not the case and the new 20-minute risk assessments make it clear that this can be done for any office quickly and easily.  We've previously provided example risk assessments to help people identify the sort of risks they should be considering, but this goes one step further in helping employers actually do the assessment for offices.  Employers know their businesses better than anyone - and with a little helping hand they can easily consider what is necessary to protect workers. Complying with the law in a low risk business can be done with common sense by anyone."

The online tool works by prompting employers to answer a series of questions about their workplace and then generates a unique risk assessment with actions required.  The HSE already provides example risk assessments for 34 workplaces, including charity shops, estate agents and hairdressers. They help businesses get to grips with the sort of risks they will need to manage.

The new 20-minute risk assessments differ because the online tool prompts employers to answer a series of straightforward questions that generates their risk assessment and action plan. Simplified risk assessments for other low risk workplaces are currently being developed.

Consultants register to improve safety advice

A new national register of occupational safety consultants will be set up to help employers access good quality, proportionate advice, the HSE has confirmed.

The Occupational Safety Consultants Register (OSCR) will go live in January 2011. It will provide firms with details of consultants who have met the highest qualification standard of recognised professional bodies and who are bound by a code of conduct that requires them to only give advice which is sensible and proportionate.

The register has been developed by HSE and a network of professional bodies representing safety consultants across Britain. Employers will visit a single website that help them to find local advisers with experience relevant to their sector.

Judith Hackitt, the HSE chair, said:

"Lord Young quite rightly recognised that businesses find it difficult to know when they need expert safety advice and where to go to get it. The Occupational Safety Consultants Register will make it easier to identify consultants who meet the highest standards within their professional bodies.  There are already many very good safety consultants who give sensible advice to employers - the register will help recognise their professional skills and also encourages those who do not yet meet these standards to do so. It will help to raise the standard of advice available to employers and increase their confidence in the advice they receive."

To be eligible to join the register, individual consultants will need to be either Chartered members of the safety bodies IOSH, CIEH or REHIS or a Fellow of the IIRSM.

Membership will mean they have a commitment to continuous professional development, a degree equivalent qualification, two years' experience, professional indemnity insurance and are bound by a code of conduct to only providing sensible and proportionate advice.

The scheme will be managed by the professional bodies themselves through a not-for-profit company, with HSE providing support.

Membership of OSCR will be voluntary. There will be an annual administration fee to be paid, although the level has yet to be set. A further announcement on the detail of the scheme will be made later in the year.

Pesticide Residues Committee publishes 2009 annual report

The 2009 Annual Report of the independent Pesticide Residues Committee has been published.

The report draws together the results of the UK's programme of pesticide residues testing in food and drink for 2009.

Over 3,800 samples of both imported and home-produced food were collected from many sources including shops, markets, ports and wholesale suppliers, and tested for a wide range of different pesticides. Results are published every quarter and then summarised at the end of the year in this annual report.

Findings indicate that there is a high rate of compliance with legislation relating to the use of pesticides and maximum residue levels (MRL), and that the pesticide residues found were not likely to pose a risk to consumer health.

In 60.8 per cent of the food sampled no pesticide residues were found. 1.1 per cent contained residues above the permitted maximum levels.

The PRC carried out risk assessments of its results, which included looking at the most vulnerable people such as children and the elderly. Where problems were identified, these were followed up by the relevant authorities to maintain high standards of protection.

Chairman of the PRC, Dr Ian Brown, said:

“We continue to strengthen the programme and in 2009 again increased the number of pesticides we looked for. We also continued with our rapid response surveys with results for grapes and pears being published monthly.  We found no increase in the incidence of residues above the MRL, despite the increase in the number of pesticides tested for and the introduction of many new MRLs as a result of legislation introduced in the autumn of 2008."

He added:

"As a doctor, I remain of the view that eating a healthy diet with a good mix of fruit and vegetables is beneficial to us all. There is a wealth of scientific evidence that shows the numerous benefits of a healthy balanced diet outweigh any concerns about pesticide residues."

As well as summarising the results of the monitoring programme, the report provides information about the role of the committee and their work throughout 2009 and takes a forward look at the monitoring programme.

1009BRN.pdf (1.00 mb)

Editorial

So what do we make of Lord Young's musings on health and safety and the compensation culture and the strident response of the Unions and others to those musings? Of course as matters stand Lord Young has not yet issued his report (that is set to be published after the party conference season has finished in October) - he has merely commented to reporters - along the lines of:

'Frankly if I want to do something stupid and break my leg or neck, that's up to me. I don't need a council to tell me not to be an idiot. I can be an idiot all by myself.' This comment has been taken to a reference to local authorities 'banning' public events such as cheese rolling, and perceived excessive safety precautions such wearing goggles to play conkers.

However the official TUC comment on Lord Young's musings is worth reading in full: TUC Health and Safety Officer Hugh Robertson said:"The signs are that Lord Young's report will be seriously unbalanced. For sure silly things are sometimes done in the name of health and safety and the behaviour of some claims firms can be reprehensible. But the real health and safety scandal in the UK is the 20,000 people who die each year due to injury or diseases linked to their work. A serious review of health and safety would put far more emphasis on dealing with this avoidable death and suffering. Losing a loved one to an occupational disease is rather more serious than losing out on the chance to join a pancake race."

I think we could be forgiven if we thought that neither understood the other, nor indeed were talking about the same issues and in fact I think this is very much the case.

If we cast our minds back to the old 'New Labour' government one of the actions they took early on was the effective abolition of legal aid for those wanting or needing assistance to make a claim for compensation. They replaced the legal aid system by permitting solicitors to enter into previously banned no-win no-fee arrangements, known as contingency fee ar­rangements in the trade which also permitted the lawyers to charge a success fee on top of the fees they were otherwise entitled to charge.

The theory was that lawyers would take the rough with the smooth - and effectively be funded to take on more challenging or perhaps more risky cases by the success fees when they won - offsetting the absence of fees when they pursued a losing case. If that really was the then government's motivation how sadly stupid and deluded they were.

Lawyers are, on occasion entrepreneurial. Guess what, if you are able to pursue winning cases virtually all the time you make handsome profits without the pesky thought that you should be taking on some challenging cases with the likelihood of loosing. So lawyers and case management businesses inevitably went in search of easy cases with very little likeli­hood of loosing - such as personal injury cases associated with road traffic accidents and accidents at work.

The compensation culture was given a massive boost by law firms seeking out winnable cases - something which the legal aid board never did when considering whether or not to fund a claimant's case under the old arrangements.

You could make the point that the compensation culture was perhaps an unintended conse­quence of the old government doing away with civil legal aid coupled with the ease of mak­ing a claim when dealing with work related accidents or injuries where the vast plethora of regulations that govern work place activity.

Now if we return to Lord Young's musings about being permitted to do 'something stu­pid' we can all agree, I'm sure, that a voluntary assumption of risk when doing something you have chosen to do in your own leisure time is probably ok for society - but none of us would, I'm sure accept that it would be reasonable or appropriate for that approach to be taken at the work place. I think all of us would have a major problem with a boss saying to a worker: 'Don't worry that lathe is a bit dodgy and I've not got round to fixing the guards, but if you are careful you should be ok...'; or even placing members of the public at risk.

We are looking forward to Lord Young's report with great interest - perhaps with the excep­tion of the no-win no fee lawyers and the claims management companies!

On a much more mundane note, when reporting on prosecutions I am going to ensure that the penalty imposed is prominently displayed and I will also attempt to rank them by penal­ty. When taking this approach you have to bear in mind that the size of any fine, whilst be­ing a reflection on the perceived seriousness of case, it is not the whole story. A defendant's ability to pay is a key factor in determining the penalty imposed - and thus a crude ranking of cases by fines will mean that less severe breaches committed by a wealthy organisation will rank higher when compared with a really serious breach by an impecunious defendant. Ranking this way will also mean that other factors such as the 30% discount on penalty for a prompt plea of guilt could distort the list. Also you have to bear in mind that in Scotland the defendant is not required to pay the costs of the investigation and prosecution which is the case elsewhere in the United Kingdom. The sentencing courts in England, Wales and North­ern Ireland have to take account of the costs being imposed with any fine when determining the total penalty to be imposed. So with these caveats on to September's news.

Andrew

 

HSE Prosecutions

Walkers and Omnichem fined after man killed by toxic gas

Total fines £350,000

Food giant Walkers Snack Foods Ltd and chemical distributor Omnichem Ltd have been fined a total of £350,000 after a worker was killed by a cloud of toxic gas.

John Marriott, 59, of Scalford, near Melton Mowbray, was working for Omnichem on 19 July 2006 when he was seriously affected by green chlorine dioxide fumes.

The HSE which brought the prosecution, told Leicester Crown Court that Mr Marriott was driving a lorry containing four steel tanks, two with sodium chlorite and two containing hy­drochloric acid, to Walkers' site in Leycroft Road, Beaumont Leys, in Leicester.

Both chemicals are used in Walkers' starch reclamation unit, which turns waste starch into food-grade material used to make snack foods. Mr Marriott inadvertently mixed up the hoses on the tanks while transferring the two chemicals from the lorry, causing them to pro­duce green fumes of chlorine dioxide.  When he realised his error, Mr Marriott stopped the transfer and started to hose the area down, but he was already starting to be affected by the toxic gas.

Mr Marriott and a Walkers' employee who tried to help, were both taken to Leicester Royal Infirmary. The Walkers' employee was in hospital for 30 hours, with breathing difficulties, but later recovered. Mr Marriott's condition gradually deteriorated, and he died from the effects of the gas a month later on 17 August 2006.

Walkers Snack Foods Ltd, of Arlington Business Park, Theale, Reading, Berkshire, pleaded guilty to breaching Sections 2(1) and 3(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 and was fined £200,000. It was also ordered to pay costs of £38,971.

Omnichem Ltd, of Asfordby Business Park, Melton Mowbray, admitted the same charges and was fined £150,000 and ordered to pay £29,229 costs.

HSE inspector Sue Thompson said:  "This incident was entirely preventable. Basic risk assessments and clear procedures could have avoided Mr Marriott's tragic death but as it was there were a catalogue of serious fail­ings.

"Employees who had tried to help Mr Marriott did not know the type of operation that was being carried out, nor the nature of the gas being released. They had no appropriate train­ing and they had no idea what to do.

"It took about an hour after the appearance of the gas cloud for Walkers to realise the grav­ity of matters, and to get employees out of the area. Walkers had no planned evacuation procedure for a chemical emergency at this location, which was a major failing.

"There were insufficient written procedures for deliveries of chemicals and for the receipt of chemicals, and the tanks were also insufficiently labelled."

Ed - this is clearly a very tragic case. Would it not have been possible to use different valves and hoses as the fuel industry does in an attempt to stop unleaded and diesel being mixed up - leaving aside the other very obvious failings.

 

Off-shore breaches bring big fines following windfarm injury

Total fines £243,750

At Aberdeen Sheriff Court Talisman Energy (UK) Ltd and Scaldis Salvage and Marine Contrac­tors B.V. have been fined a total of £243,750 for breaches of Health and Safety legislation which resulted in serious injury to an offshore worker.

On 25 August 2006, 20km offshore in the Moray Firth, during construction of the Beatrice Windfarm Turbine B, one of two wind turbine generators which were being built to provide power to the Beatrice AP Oil Platform. Alexander Murray, 48, from Aberdeen, was standing on a partly completed structure whilst another part was lowered into place by a heavy lift vessel, when the part swung towards him and crushed his left leg. The incident resulted in Mr Murray's left leg having to be amputated.

The case was investigated by the HSE and prosecuted by the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS) Health and Safety Division. Guilty pleas were tendered by the two companies.

Following the case, Elaine Taylor, Head of the COPFS Health and Safety Division, said:

"Failures to properly respect health and safety can have a huge impact on people's lives. Everyone has the right to a safe working environment. It is the responsibility of employers to ensure this. When they fail to meet their responsibilities they can expect to be prosecuted.

"In this case, as a result of this joint working, both companies pled guilty which meant that the case was resolved without the case proceeding to trial and witnesses being required to give evidence. This wholly avoidable incident has had a devastating effect on Mr Murray's life. We hope, however, that he can derive some comfort from our commitment to prosecute those in breach of health and safety legislation and to work with the enforcing authorities to raise standards of health and safety in the workplace, hopefully to prevent similar incidents in future."

Following the case, HSE Principal Inspector Marc Nunn said:

"Mr Murray lost his leg in this avoidable incident that could have easily had far worse conse­quences. The case demonstrates the importance of adequately planning and assessing the risks, and implementing sensible management controls, for all lifting activities.

"Both Talisman and Scaldis should reasonably have foreseen the potential for the load to move, and taken measures to prevent their personnel being exposed to the hazards of a swinging load."

Newhaven docks and shipping co fined following drowning

Total fines £185,000

Croydon Crown Court heard that the Sardina Vera ferry, which was owned by Forship S.p.a, had docked at Newhaven late on 12 January 2005 when the incident happened.

Crew member Luigi Feola, 38 from Sardinia, was responsible for bringing fresh water on to the ship and was seen carrying a hose along a narrow strip of quay alongside the ship just before the incident.

An hour after the ship had docked someone on board heard a splash in the water and raised the alarm. A search was mounted immediately, but Mr Feola's body was not found until the next day. A post-mortem examination revealed he had suffered a head wound before drowning.

An investigation by the HSE found that the quayside where Mr Feola was working had insuf­ficient edge protection, was not properly lit and the risks of the job had not been properly assessed.  After the incident, HSE issued Newhaven Port & Properties Limited with an Improvement Notice, requiring the company to maintain the quay at Newhaven Docks, in a safe condition, but the company had still failed to comply with this by the end of April 2005.

HSE inspector, Paul Vinnicombe, said:

"It's absolutely vital that the quaysides at ports are maintained properly, are well lit and are fit for purpose. The lack of proper planning, combined with the appalling state of the quay­side at the port, led to the unnecessary death of Mr Feola. On top of that, the risks involved in the job he was asked to do had not been assessed, and he was not give a suitable life­jacket, torch, or radio. This highlights why rigorous health and safety procedures are needed at working ports, and it is totally unacceptable that improvements identified following the incident were not made sooner."

Newhaven Port & Properties Limited, of East Quay, pleaded guilty to breaching section 3(1) HSWA. The company also pleaded guilty to failing to maintain Newhaven Docks as required by an Improvement Notice issued after the incident. The company was fined £85,000 and ordered to pay costs of £34,000.

Forship S.p.a, of Porto Vado, Italy, pleaded guilty to breaching section 2(1) HSWA. The com­pany was fined £100,000 and ordered to pay costs of £43,782.

 

Interserve fined and the MoD censured

Total fine £33,000 and Crown Censure

The Ministry of Defence has received a formal Crown Censure from the HSE after potentially exposing workers to asbestos fibres. As a Crown body the MoD cannot be prosecuted as a private company would be in the criminal courts.

The Censure was received by a senior manager from Defence Estates on behalf of MoD. Defence Estates is an operating arm of the MoD and is responsible for managing the military estate - including managing asbestos on the estate.

In early 2005 an asbestos survey at an MoD base near Bicester, Oxfordshire was ignored for more than a year. The original survey considered a boiler room on the base to be contami­nated with asbestos and the report recommended access to the room be restricted until the asbestos had been removed.

Defence Estates and their facilities management company Interserve (Defence) Ltd, of Wa­terloo Road, London, failed to follow the advice of the survey and, consequently, workers were left at risk of exposure to deadly asbestos fibres.

In the Crown Censure the HSE asserted that in its view the MoD did not comply with regula­tions 4(8)(c), 6(1)(a) and 10(1)(a) of the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2002 at the Bicester site between 23 May 2005 and 30 September 2006.

HSE Director for its East and South East Division, Heather Bryant, who chaired the Censure hearing said:

"Defence Estates and Interserve (Defence) Ltd knew that asbestos-containing materials existed at the Bicester site but the arrangements they had in place for managing them were not effective in controlling this well-known risk. The standard for managing asbestos at the Bicester site fell far below what the law requires.

HSE's investigating inspector, Matthew Lee, said:

"Asbestos may be present in any premises built before the year 2000 in a variety of forms. When disturbed, damaged or left in poor condition it can give rise to a risk of exposure to employees working in the vicinity.

"It is therefore essential that duty holders have effective arrangements for detecting it and managing the risk it may present.

"Facilities managers are key to ensuring that these effective systems are in place to protect workers and to ensure that duty holders meet their legal responsibilities."

Interserve (Defence) Ltd, of Waterloo Road, London were prosecuted and were fined £33,000 and ordered to pay costs of £17,936 for offences under the same regulations.

Ed - [ Crown bodies, including departments and agencies enjoy what is known as 'Crown Immunity.' This immunity means that such bodies cannot be prosecuted or have any other statutory enforcement brought against them other than a 'Crown Censure.'

Cabinet Office Personnel Information Note 45 (PIN 45) deals with the enforcement proce­dures for Crown bodies, including Crown censures, can be found on HSE's website at: www.hse.gov.uk/foi/internalops/sectors/public/7_01_34.pdf [2]

 

Partners and company fined after worker killed

Total fines £30,000

Fines totalling £30,000 have been imposed following the death of a Salford worker, who was struck by the excavator bucket on a digger.

John Cain, 36, was working on a project to demolish the Albert Park Inn on Great Clowes Street in Salford on 22 November 2004 when he was hit by the bucket on a digger. He died from his injuries later that day.

The HSE prosecuted two individuals and a company for health and safety offences, following an investigation into his death. Business partners Barry Godliman and Robert Watson were the principal contractors on the site, and Windmill Demolition Company Ltd was a specialist subcontractor hired to carry out the demolition work.

Albert Park Inn demolition site in Salford

HSE Inspector Stuart Kitchingman added:

"This case demonstrates how important it is for contractors to be aware of their health and safety duties, especially when there are several companies working on a project.

"Barry Godliman and Robert Watson were the principal contractors on the site and so should have made sure all work was carried out safely. Windmill Demolition had been hired to oversee and carry out the demolition work, and so had responsibilities for managing safety as well.  I hope this case will encourage construction companies to do more to manage health and safety on sites effectively."

Barry Godliman and Robert Watson pleaded guilty to breaching Section 3(1) HSWA by fail­ing to ensure the safety of workers on the site. Both were fined £7,500 and ordered to pay £2,000 each.

Windmill Demolition, of Windmill Lane in Denton, was found guilty of the same offence fol­lowing a trial at Manchester Crown Court in July. The company was fined £15,000 with no costs.

 

Company and director prosecuted after worker plunges

Total fines £30,000

A building company and its director have been fined a total of £30,000 after a worker fell nearly thirty feet from scaffolding at a building site in Llanfairfechan, sustaining severe inju­ries.

JBB Homes Ltd of St. Petersgate, Stockport in Cheshire - which has subsequently gone into liquidation - pleaded guilty to breaching Section 2(1) HSWA. It was fined £20,000 and or­dered to pay costs of £10,835.  The site in Llanfairfechan where the incident took place.

The company's director, James Burt, based at the same address in Stockport, pleaded guilty to breaching Section 37(1) of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 and was fined £10,000.

Llandudno Magistrates' Court heard that builder Nicholas Roberts, 28 years old from Rhyl, was working on scaffolding at a site in Gwylanedd, The Promenade, Llanfairfechan on 4 De­cember 2007 when the incident happened.

The HSE investigation found that Mr Roberts was carrying out work to replace a lintel, when he fell from the scaffolding. He fractured his pelvis in three places, broke some teeth and bruised his pelvis and groin.

Following the hearing HSE Inspector, Debbie John, said:

"Falling from a height of around nine metres, Mr Roberts was extremely lucky to survive. It's incredible that he managed to walk away with broken bones.

"JBB Homes Limited and James Burt failed in their duty to provide a safe system of work, including a lack of suitable means to prevent falls from the scaffolding. Mr Burt also failed to properly supervise his staff.

"Falls from height remain the single biggest cause of workplace deaths and one of the main causes of major injury and construction companies must not leave safety of their workers as an after-thought, which could lead to tragic consequences."

 

Company fined after 17-year-old worker injured in fall

Total fine £28,500

A Croydon company has been fined after a young worker suffered multiple fractures and internal injuries when he fell through a roof-light after only weeks into his job.

Lewis Edwards, 17, from Sidcup, had only been at STP Solutions Ltd a few weeks when the incident happened and it was his first job since leaving school.

An investigation by the HSE revealed that his employers told him to go onto a warehouse roof and clean out the guttering at the Argent Centre, Pump Lane, in Hayes Middlesex on May 2009.

City of London Magistrates heard that this was an unsafe way to carry out the work and that Mr Edwards was left alone and unsupervised to do the job.

Mr Edwards was crossing the roof when he stepped through a roof light and fell 7m onto the floor of the empty warehouse. He suffered multiple fractures to his pelvis, a number of vertebrae, his collar bone, upper left arm, elbow and left wrist. His spleen was ruptured and had to be removed in emergency surgery.

The court also heard that Mr Edwards used to be a very good footballer having played for West Ham juniors. He had started to take coaching qualifications, but his injuries have had a limiting effect on his life and he is still receiving medical treatment.

The company, STP Solutions, of St Andrews Road, Croydon, pleaded guilty to breaching s2(1) HSWA and reg 3(1) (a) MHSWR and reg 4(1) of the Work at Height Regulations 2005.

The company was fined £28,500 and ordered to pay costs of £9,359.

HSE inspector Clare Hawkes said:

"There is no reason why this job could not have been carried out safely if the company had planned and supervised it properly. The horrendous injuries suffered by this young man could have been avoided if the safety risks had been managed and a safe method of work put in place.  Young, inexperienced workers cannot be expected to be aware of risks or have knowledge of safety controls. It's the employer's responsibility to put in place measures to ensure their employees' safety at work."

"The dangers of working at height are well known and there's a wealth of free guidance available on how to work safely at height."

Lewis's mother, Sara Edwards, said: "16 months since Lewis's horrific accident, he still bears the physical and mental scars that have had a tragic effect on his life, and the pressures of this have torn our family apart. His accident was directly due to the lack of supervision, training and safety management of his employers.  He should never have been placed in such a vulnerable position and he will now have to carry this with him for the rest of his life."

 

Sawmill fined after two severely injured in three months

Total fine £28,000

A Troon sawmilling firm has been fined a total of £28,000 after two of its employees were severely injured in separate incidents less than three months apart.

On 28 May 2007, John Wilson, 55, of Dalmellington, Ayrshire, was working for Adam Wil­son and Sons Limited in Troon, Ayrshire, when he fell through a gap in a raised walkway left open after work had been done on a conveyor belt below. He suffered serious injuries to his arm and permanent loss of movement in his shoulder as a result of the fall.

Less than three months later, on 24 August 2007, Robert Cumming, 59, of Ayr, was work­ing at the same plant when his head was trapped between the metal parts of a hoist after it was switched on while he was working on it. He suffered serious crush injuries to his head and neck and required emergency surgery. He is having ongoing physiotherapy for his inju­ries.

The HSE found that the company did not have safe systems of work in place for maintaining the conveyor belt, or the hoist machine. The investigation also found that staff had not been given enough information, training, instruction and supervision on the importance of safe systems of work and machinery isolation when doing maintenance work.

Adam Wilson and Sons Limited pleaded guilty to breaching HSWA Section 2 in both cases. They were fined £8,000 for the first incident and £20,000 for the second incident.

HSE Inspector Helen Diamond said:

"These were two serious and entirely preventable accidents which will affect both Mr Wilson and Mr Cumming for the rest of their lives.

"Employers need to recognise the importance of making sure that safe systems of work are in place to prevent these sorts of accident, and to give their employees the training, informa­tion, instruction and supervision they need to carry out their work safely."

 

Worker dies during demolition at boarding school

Total fine £25,000

A Shropshire boarding school has been fined £25,000 after a worker was killed while demol­ishing a building on the site.

The HSE prosecuted Moor Park Charitable Trust Ltd which runs Moor Park School, after it ar­ranged for a team of inexperienced building workers to demolish a large wooden classroom on 14 August 2007.

The HSE investigation revealed the workers had no effective plan in place and removed in­tegral supports within the classroom's structure, causing the roof to collapse while five men were inside.

Mark Evans, aged 40, of Ludlow suffocated when the roof, which weighed 2.4 tonnes, fell on top of him. The four other men survived without serious injury thanks to the chance posi­tioning of a dumper which was parked inside part of the building, creating an escape route.

Shrewsbury Crown Court heard that Moor Park School had arranged for a self-employed general building worker, Mr Christopher Morris who was undertaking some minor roofing work on the site, to carry out the work.

He asked four other self-employed building workers to assist in the demolition even though none of them had training or relevant experience. The school failed to make any reasonable enquiries into the competence of the men to undertake the demolition work prior to the work beginning.

HSE inspector Nic Rigby said:

"There were five men inside this building when it collapsed. Mr Evans paid the ultimate price for the school's failings. But for sheer good fortune, all five of them could have been killed."

"But Mr Evans and the other workers should not have been put at such increased risk. Had Moor Park School taken reasonable steps to properly consider the demolition work, they would have appointed a competent and experienced contractor, and avoided the roof col­lapse."

"This awful event and the prosecution of the school must send a very clear message to all those who commission construction or demolition work. It must be properly planned and carried out by those with the experience and competence to do so."

Moor Park School of Moor Park in Ludlow pleaded guilty to breaching s3(1) HSWA. As well as the fine, it was also ordered to pay £15,000 in costs.

 

Manufacturer fined following death

Total fines £20,000

A building materials manufacturer and its director have been fined a total of £20,000 after a former soldier was killed by an industrial mixing machine blade.

The HSE prosecuted Bury-based Building Chemical Research (1984) Ltd (BCR) and company director Stuart Reich, 62, following Paul Palmer's death at the company's premises on Sion Street in Radcliffe.

[1] Paul Palmer had climbed into the machine - a powerful, slow speed mixer - to clean it on 30 August 2005 when it was switched on by another employee. Bolton Crown Court heard that it should have been impossible to switch on the machine while someone was inside.

Mr Palmer was brought up in Holywell in North Wales and served in the Falklands, Bosnia and Kuwait during his 13 years in the army. His brother, Ted Palmer, said:

"My other brother, John, died from an asbestos disease a few years before Paul, and their deaths have really devastated our family.  Paul was just a happy-go-lucky chap. Not a lot fazed him; he just took everything in his stride. It just seems wrong that he survived over a decade in the army and then was killed by a machine in a factory.  I can't understand how manufacturing companies can become complacent over health and safety in this day and age. I just hope highlighting Paul's death will stop it happening to someone else."  The machine which caused Mr Palmer's death

BCR was fined £16,000 and ordered to pay £8,000 towards the cost of the prosecution on 20 September. The company's director, Stuart Reich of Gisburn Road, Gisburn, Lancashire, was fined £4,000 and ordered to pay costs of £2,000. (Ed presumably a breach of s37 HSWA in the case of Mr Reich)

Both admitted their offences.

 

Preston engineering firm in court over worker's death

Total fines £17,500

A Preston engineering firm has been fined after a worker was killed when he became en­tangled in machinery.

An HSE investigation detailed how Michael Lohaza was found dead after becoming trapped in a lathe at Autoy Ltd's site on Castleton Road in Preston on 10 January 2009.

The machine which caused Mr Lohaza's death

The 45-year-old, from Ashton-on-Ribble in Preston, was discovered by two colleagues in a small building next to the main workshop, where he had been working alone. He had worked at the firm for 28 years.  Preston Crown Court heard Mr Lohaza was killed when he became entangled on a one-metre-long metal screw, while cutting its thread on a lathe. The screw was rotating approxi­mately 200 times every minute.

Autoy Ltd was prosecuted by HSE for failing to ensure Mr Lohaza's safety, and for failing to assess the risks workers faced while operating lathes

The company pleaded guilty to breaching Section 2(1) HSWA and reg 3(1)(a) MHSWA 1999.

Autoy Ltd was fined £17,500 and ordered to pay £12,251 costs at Preston Crown Court on 24 September

Michael Clarke, the investigating inspector at HSE, said:

"It is extremely sad that Michael Lohaza needlessly lost his life after nearly three decades working for the same company.

"The risk of entanglement on lathes is well known in the engineering industry, which is why trained machine operators are required to wear suitable clothing. Those with long hair should be told to have it securely fastened and out of harm's way.

"Autoy was unable to demonstrate it had assessed the risks faced by employees working alone on the lathe. It should have made sure all workers, including Michael, wore suitable clothing while operating the lathe. If they had taken this action then Michael might still be alive today."

Autoy Ltd, which has relocated to Summit House in Higher Walton, was established in 1943 and supplies metal components to the aerospace, automotive, nuclear and other industries.

 

Horrific hand injury

Total fine £16,000

A manufacturing company has been fined £16,000 after a worker's finger and thumb were severed as he tried to unblock machinery.

Production Supervisor Simon Partridge was in charge of the night-shift at Saint-Gobain We­ber Ltd, in Flitwick, Bedfordshire, when he suffered the injuries on 28 November 2007.

The Bedfordshire plant was manufacturing façade tiling and materials for the construction industry when a waste extraction system - which took dust out of the workplace - became blocked. Mr Partridge, 37, of Clapham, near Bedford, attempted to clear the blockage with his left hand and it became entangled in the rotary valve. His finger and thumb were cut off by the machine and could not be saved, despite extensive surgery.

Investigations by the HSE found the machine's safety guards could be removed by members of staff using tools the company had provided, which is against the legal requirement for guarding to be in place. Inspectors were also concerned about the system for isolating the power from machinery, which was below expected standards.

Saint-Gobain Weber Limited, of Dickens House, Maulden Road, Enterprise Way, Flitwick, Bedfordshire, appeared at Bedford and Mid-Bedfordshire Magistrates' Court yesterday (Tuesday 28 September) to face charges brought by HSE.

The firm, which manufactures materials for the construction industry, admitted breaching s2(1) HSWA. The Magistrates fined the company £16,000 and required it to pay £3,560 in costs.

HSE Inspector Graham Tompkins said:

"Unfortunately this kind of horrific injury is all too common. This case would not have hap­pened if a suitable system of work had been used, including power isolation arrangements and safety guards that were not so easily bypassed. Employers have a legal obligation to protect the safety of their workers and help prevent serious injuries like this occurring. HSE will not hesitate to prosecute when companies fail in this basic duty."

 

Skegness firm prosecuted over fatal fall at Doncaster farm

Total fine £15,000

A Skegness caravan park operator has been fined £15,000 for safety failings after a worker fell to his death in a hay barn near Doncaster.

Blue Anchor Leisure Ltd, of Chapel St Leonards, pleaded guilty to a breach of s3(1) HSWA at Doncaster Magistrates Court.

Clifford Hartley, 59, from Skegness, was re-roofing a fire-damaged barn at Westfield Farm, on Nutwell Lane, Armthorpe, with a colleague when the incident occurred on 4 September 2008.

A stack of hay bales had been positioned inside the barn to provide a working platform and to try and break any falls, but when Mr Hartley fell from the roof he landed 18 inches to the side of them onto a concrete floor, sustaining fatal head injuries.

The hay bales were only stacked to roof level in parts and didn't extend far enough inside the barn to provide complete protection. So when Mr Hartley fell they were effectively use­less.

The HSE brought charges against Blue Anchor Leisure Ltd for failing to adequately protect its employees.

In addition to the £15,000 fine, the company was also ordered to pay £4,964 in costs.

After the hearing HSE inspector Medani Close said:

"This is a tragic death that could easily have been avoided had Mr Hartley's employer taken more time to assess the potential risks to him and his co-worker, and done more to avoid them.

"The bales of hay in the barn could have provided an adequate safety system, however, the way they were situated left little room for error and they clearly weren't fit for purpose. That responsibility and subsequent failing ultimately rests with Blue Anchor Leisure Ltd." 

 

Premier foods fined after worker's skull crushed

Total fines £14,000

The UK's biggest food manufacturer has been fined £14,000 after a 65kg metal pillar fell on a maintenance engineer in Merseyside, crushing his skull.

Thomas Williams, from Prenton in Wirral, was working at Premier Foods Group Ltd's site at Manor Bakeries in Moreton on 24 July 2008 when a 4m section of pillar fell on his head.

Premier Foods was prosecuted by the HSE for failing to ensure the safety of its employees.

Wirral Magistrates' Court heard the 61-year-old suffered severe traumatic brain and spinal injuries, and was in hospital for more than six months. He now has difficulty speaking and moving, and his wife hasn't been able to work since, in order to look after him.

Mr Williams and a colleague had been helping to remove cages and pillars from a storage area at the Reeds Lane site. They used an angle grinder to cut the pillar, but when they levered it free at the base it came detached from the ceiling at the same time and struck Mr Williams.

The HSE investigation found that the company had not properly planned the task, and had not trained workers on how to carry out the work safely.

Phil Redman, the investigating inspector at HSE, said:

The section of pillar that caused the injury

"A man's life has been turned upside down because basic health and safety procedures weren't followed. Mr Williams has been permanently disabled from his injuries and will never be able to return to work.  Premier Foods could have brought in specialists to carry out the work but instead Mr Wil­liams and a colleague were just told to get on with the job.

"Mr Williams did not have any previous experience of carrying out this kind of work, and he should not have been put in a position where he had to make decisions about how to do it. There really is no excuse for a company the size of Premier Foods to make this kind of error when it comes to health and safety."

Premier Foods Group Ltd, of Centrium Business Park, Griffiths Way, St Albans, pleaded guilty to breaching s2(1) HSWA. The company was ordered to pay £6,808 towards the cost of the prosecution in addition to the fine.

 

Failure to assess risk

Total fines £14,000

RM Supplies (Inverkeithing) Ltd pleaded guilty to breaching Regulation 4(1) and 5 of the Docks Regulations 1988. The company was fined a total of £14,000 following an incident in which after a night watchman was injured falling into water from the quayside.

The operation involved the berthing of a vessel at Berth No.1 of a quay that was in a severe­ly dilapidated condition. This was done at night, even though the quay lacked any lighting. In the course of this operation, Charles Greenhill, 47, fell into the water between the quay and the berthing vessel. Due to a lack of adequate means of escape or rescue, Mr Greenhill had to be rescued by the vessel's lifeboat.

At Dunfermline Sheriff Court Mr Thomas Muir, who was Director of RM Supplies (In­verkeithing) Ltd, also pleaded guilty to the charge of failure to carry out suitable and suffi­cient risk assessment - a breach of reg 3(1) MHSWR.

HSE Inspector Michael Orr said:

"This was a significant breach of health and safety law which could have resulted in death had it not been for the intervention of the ship's crew. The conditions on site were unaccept­able. There was no suitable or sufficient risk assessment, or attempt at planning which could have identified the state of the quay as unacceptable for use for any dock operations. This case should serve as a warning to all employers to ensure that routine and infrequent activi­ties are effectively planned."

Ed - Regulation 4(1) of the Docks Regulations 1988 place duties owners or controllers of dock premises (even if they employ no one) in relation to any person whether employed or not who uses their premises. These duties only extend to matters within the person's con­trol.

Regulation 5 of the Docks Regulations 1988 states that dock operations shall be planned and executed in such a manner as to ensure so far as is reasonably practicable that no person will be exposed to danger. The Approved Code of Practice the regulations makes specific reference to mooring and berthing operations. This work is frequently carried out by boat­men who will handle the mooring ropes from their own vessels and on shore. Matters to be considered include the provision of adequate lighting (Regulation 6), safe access (Regula­tion 7) and protective clothing (Regulation 19). Safe systems of work should be laid down to cover mooring operations. 

 

Textile company fined after worker's arm crushed

Total fines £13,500

A fabric manufacturer has been fined after a worker's arm was so badly crushed he had to have metal plates inserted to help support his broken bones.

Agency worker Robert Dunn, 32, of Ringwood, South Bretton, Peterborough, was operating a fabric winding machine on 4 November 2009 when his left arm was drawn into the roll of material and crushed, breaking all three arm bones. He also suffered ripped cartilage in his left knee, caused by the sudden movement.

E-Leather Limited appeared at Peterborough Magistrates' Court and admitted breaching reg 11 PUWER and reg3(1)(b) MHSWR 1999.

The company, based at the Kingsbridge Centre, Sturrock Way, Peterborough, was fined £13,500 and ordered to pay £5,000 in costs.

An investigation by the HSE found inadequate safety guards on dangerous parts of machin­ery and no sufficient and suitable risk assessment in place.

HSE Inspector Alison Ashworth said:

"Robert Dunn suffered a terrible injury because of an incident that was entirely avoidable. Proper safety guards play an important role in protecting workers from dangerous moving parts and the company had a responsibility to ensure suitable guarding was in place. Had a suitable and sufficient risk assessment been carried out then this issue would have been highlighted straight away."

"HSE will continue to prosecute companies that fail to carry out their duty to ensure the health and safety of their employees."

 

Newcastle City Council fined after child injured

Total fine £12,000

Newcastle City Council has been fined after a five-year-old girl needed surgery when she was injured by an interactive exhibit at one of its museums.

The child was visiting the Discovery Museum in Newcastle with her family when she placed her hand in an opening of the "Floating on Air" exhibit on 17 August 2009.

The opening led down into the rotating blades of a fan which powered the air flow through the machine. The opening should have been protected by a guard which was missing and so the girl's hand came into contact with the rotating blades of the fan.

The five-year-old put her hand through the opening and suffered serious injuries, which required immediate surgery.

The HSE prosecuted Newcastle City Council, which runs the museum, following the incident. Newcastle City Council, pleaded guilty to breaching s3(1) HSWA. It was fined £12,000 and was ordered to pay costs of £7,733.

The HSE's investigation showed that there was no formal system in place to ensure the ex­hibit was in good condition and was safe to use.

Since the incident the youngster also had to undergo further surgery, including a skin graft and a tendon harvest and replacement. The injury has meant she has not been able to take part in some activities, such as swimming and gymnastics and has had repeated hospital visits. Two of her fingers are still bent and scarred.

After the case, HSE inspector, Carol Forster, said:

"The serious injuries that this young girl suffered could easily have been avoided. The Float­ing on Air exhibit had been in use for a number of years, yet the gap had not been fixed. The health and safety of members of the public, especially children, who use interactive exhibits in museums is very important.

"It's important that councils, like any other organisations, must have systems and proce­dures in place to ensure that the safety of members of the public is not put at risk by their activities."

 

Glass company fined for workers' fall risk

Total fine £10,000

A glass company has been prosecuted for health and safety offences after putting workers' lives at risk at a site in Bradford.

Workers at Intercity Glazing Systems Ltd, based in Drighlington, had been made to work at height without a safe system in place, leaving them at risk of falling up to 6m.

During work at a building in Carlisle Road, Bradford, in May 2009, the HSE found that the company did not properly supervise or manage staff working at height.

Some equipment, including tower scaffolding, was not being used safely, and guardrails were also missing from some parts of the working area. The system of work used by the company to install glass above the ground floor was so unsafe that the work was stopped when HSE served Prohibition Notices on the company.

Intercity Glazing Systems pleaded guilty at Bradford Magistrates' Court to breaching the Work at Height Regulations 2005. The company was fined £10,000 and ordered to pay costs of £2,538.

 

Firm fined after worker burned

Total fines £10,000

A company has today been fined £10,000 after a worker received 60 per cent burns follow­ing an explosion at a Nottingham factory.

The 33-year-old welder from llkeston, who has asked not to be named,was working for Fluo­rocarbon Bakeware Systems Ltd, which manufactures industrial bakeware, on 16 December

2008 at its unit in Beeston.

Nottingham Magistrates Court heard that the worker was cutting metal, when a spark ignit­ed vapours from a nearby can of thinner. The can exploded, showering him with hot liquid.

The HSE brought the prosecution against Fluorocarbon Bakeware Systems, found that al­though flammable liquids were stored correctly in other parts of the site, there was no provision for the storage of the thinners in this area and that no risk assessment had been carried out.

HSE inspector Sian Tiernan said:

"This incident was entirely preventable had simple precautions been taken. This must have been a terrifying incident for the worker, and it was only by chance that his colleague had left the work area a few moments earlier otherwise he too could have been injured. HSE's investigation showed that there was little in the way of direct supervision of the work and no risk assessment was undertaken for the activities carried out in the workshop. Thinner is highly flammable and a risk assessment should have shown how it should have been stored safety. No appropriate store was provided for the thinners and the designated storage area was too close to the work area, with terrible results."

Fluorocarbon Bakeware Systems Ltd of Caxton Hill, Hertford, pleaded guilty to contravening regulations 5(1) and 6(1) of the Dangerous Substances and Explosive Atmospheres Regula­tions 2002 and was fined £10,000 at Nottingham Magistrates' Court. It was also ordered to pay costs of £5,227.

Ed - Regulation 5(1) of the Dangerous Substances and Explosive Atmospheres Regulations 2002 states: "Where a dangerous substance is or is liable to be present at the workplace, the employer shall make a suitable and sufficient assessment of the risks to his employees which arise from that substance".

Regulation 6(1) of the Dangerous Substances and Explosive Atmospheres Regulations 2002 states: "Every employer shall ensure that risk is either eliminated or reduced so far as is rea­sonably practicable".

 

Concrete firm fined after worker's roof plunge

Total fine £10,000

A Hounslow company has been fined after a man was injured after falling more than 4m from a roof he was working on.

Alfie Deville 59, from Petworth Gardens, Uxbridge, was injured when he and three other men were dismantling a large steel framed building on 30 April 2009.

Two of the men went onto the roof to unscrew panels before removing them. The court heard the men were provided with a cherry picker, which would have enabled them to carry out the work without stepping onto the roof but they left the basket of the cherry picker.

Mr Deville stepped on a panel he had previously unscrewed but not removed. The panel gave way and Mr Deville fell to the ground below.

He fell more than 4m suffering a broken collarbone, six fractured ribs and a head wound requiring seven stitches.

A HSE investigation showed Master Concrete had failed to properly plan the work and iden­tify or address any hazards associated with the dismantling of the building.

The court heard the workers involved in the dismantling had no training or experience of this type of work.

After the incident a prohibition notice was served preventing further dismantling of the building until the work was properly planned and carried out by competent persons. How­ever, this was ignored and the building was subsequently demolished by untrained employ­ees.

HSE prosecuted Master Concrete Limited of Bedfont Trading Estate, Feltham for its role in the incident. The company was found guilty to breaching s2(1) HSWA at the City of Lon­don Magistrates' Court, on 18 May 2010. It was fined £10,000 and ordered to pay costs of £18,923.25.

HSE Inspector Loraine Charles said:

"If the work had been properly planned and carried out by workers who were competent to do it, then this needless injury could have been avoided.

"Master Concrete Limited had a responsibility to ensure that there was a safe system of work in place for the dismantling of this structure, which it did not fulfil, and as a result Alfie Deville sustained a serious injury."

 

Thrown from a fairground ride

Total fines £10,000

The owner of a faulty fairground ride and an inspector who declared it safe have both been fined following an incident during the British Grand Prix weekend.

The court heard that two people were thrown from the 'Tagada' fairground ride at Silver­stone, in Buckinghamshire, on the day of the 2008 British Grand Prix, when the seating col­lapsed.

Michael Searle, from South Ockendon in Essex, who owned the ride, pleaded guilty to breaching section 3(2) HSWA. He was fined £3,000 and was also ordered to pay £1,000 in costs at Aylesbury Crown Court.

The director of Fairground Inspection Services Ltd, Michael Rodgers, of Pymm Leys Lane, Groby in Leicestershire, pleaded guilty to breaching section 3(1) HSWA. He was fined £3,000 with £2,000 costs.

His company, which is registered at Plot 10, Five Counties Caravan Park, Stretton Road, in Leicestershire, pleaded guilty to the same offence and was fined £7,000 fine with £2,000 costs.

The Tagada is a ground-level spinning machine that bounces its riders as it turns. The court heard that on 6 July 2008 two members of the public were thrown off as it spun at speed. Both suffered back injuries and bruising but have since recovered.

An investigation by the HSE found that the ride failed due to corroded structural steel work on the seating. The corrosion was significant and clear to see, and should have been identi­fied by the ride owner, Mr Searle, and during an inspection visit by Mr Rodgers.

HSE Inspector, Karl Howes, said:

"Fairground rides should be exciting but safe. Everyone on this ride faced a real risk, because the owner and inspector failed to comply with the law. The two injured men were fortunate because they could easily have suffered more serious injuries. It is the responsibility of those who operate or inspect fairground rides to ensure they carry out their duties thoroughly by identifying and repairing corrosion and wear on the equipment. This incident should remind all ride operators and ride examiners that public safety on fairground rides is of paramount importance."

 

Worker's clothing set alight in electrical explosion

Total fines £9,000

George Forbes, 62, of Nigg, Aberdeen, was working for Graeme W Cheyne (Builders) Ltd refurbishing flats on Holburn Street in the city on 11 November 2008 when he attempted to move a redundant electricity power supply, known as a fuse cut-out, because he needed to fit new plasterboard behind it.

Unknown to Mr Forbes, the fuse cut-out was still live and connected to a 415 volt cable when he touched it. The HSE investigation revealed that the cable was twisted, causing a short-circuit that created enough energy to melt the cable and create a small explosion. The firm was fined £9,000 and ordered to pay Mr Forbes £4,000.

Aberdeen Sheriff Court heard that Mr Forbes suffered burns to his face and his left hand. Whilst he recovered and returned to work a few weeks later, he was extremely lucky not to have been electrocuted.

Graeme W Cheyne (Builders) Ltd, of Sugarhouse Lane, Aberdeen, pleaded guilty to failing to provide and maintain a safe system of work for employees working on or near an electrical system, breaching Section 2(1) HSWA.

Following the case, HSE Inspector Liz Standen said:

"It's lucky Mr Forbes was not electrocuted or more seriously hurt when the 415 volt cable blew up in his face in what was an entirely avoidable incident.

"Graeme W Cheyne (Builders) Ltd, should have checked that all redundant electrical services on the property had been proven to be dead by a competent person before working on or near them.  It is extremely dangerous to make assumptions that electrical equipment is safe to work with."

 

Chicken firm fined after worker skins hand

Total fines £8,000

A chicken company has been prosecuted after a worker using a carcass 'de-skinning' ma­chine tore the skin off the back of his own hand.

The employee was using the machine to skin chickens when his glove became caught and his hand was pulled onto the cutting blade.

The de-skinning machine the worker was using

Thetford Magistrates' Court heard today that the skin on the back of his hand, from his knuckles to his wrist, was torn completely away from the underlying tissue in the incident on 24 July 2009.

Crown Chicken Ltd, which processes 365,000 chickens a week at its site on the Norfolk/Suf­folk border, pleaded guilty to four breaches of health and safety law, including a separate incident where a second worker's hand was crushed.

An investigation by the HSE into the first incident found the machine did not have adequate guards, there was no emergency stop button, and the gloves were not suitably protective.

Five months later, on 7 December 2009, another employee severed a finger when his hand was crushed by the lifting mechanism of a forklift truck when he was standing on the forks to access the back of a trailer.

HSE and manufacturer guidance warns it is unsafe to stand on the forks of a forklift truck but the company had not provided a safe way for workers to access the back of the trailers.

HSE inspector, Saffron Turnell, said:

"These two incidents resulted in very serious and painful injuries to both men. What is more,

both could easily have been avoided if Crown Chicken had taken the correct health and safety precautions.

"The company failed to ensure that simple measures were in place to protect employees us­ing the de-skinning machine. Similarly, the company had no safe method for staff to access the refrigerated trailers.

"Employers must ensure that appropriate health and safety measures are in place and that appropriate equipment is used. HSE will not hesitate to take action against employers failing to comply with the law and putting workers at risk."

Crown Chicken Ltd, of Crown Farm, Weybread, Diss, admitted two breaches of Section 2(1) HSWA. Magistrates fined the firm £4,000 for each charge (total £8,000) and ordered it to pay £5,500 in costs.

 

Dangerously faulty play equipment leads to prosecution

Penalty: Suspended prison sentence

A Prestatyn man has been given an 18 week suspended prison sentence and 60 hours of community service after ignoring a legal order preventing him from issuing safety certifi­cates for inflatable amusements.

The HSE served a prohibition notice on Peter John Morrell (also known as Peter Michael Coltilda) of Aberconwy Road in November 2008 after an investigation revealed he had passed inflatables as safe to use when they were not. He had previously pleaded guilty to three separate offences last year and was given conditional discharges by the court.

He was ordered to stop inspecting play equipment and issuing safety certificates. But less than a month after the Notice was issued, it emerged that he had ignored the ban and ille­gally issued a certificate after a colleague carried out an inspection on an inflatable at Wel­lington Civic & Leisure Centre, Telford, despite there being a safety defect with the blower.

Mr Morrell tried to inspect the inflatable again six months later, but the centre turned him away.

At Shrewsbury Crown Court today, Mr Morrell pleaded guilty to breaching Section 33(1)(g) HSWA. He was given an 18 week suspended prison sentence, ordered to carry out 60 hours of community service and ordered to pay £500 towards costs.

HSE inspector Janice Dale said:

"By continuing to take money for issuing safety certificates, Mr Morrell not only cheated the companies he issued the certificates for, but also risked the wellbeing of the young children using the inflatable and its blower.

"The reason that an initial prohibition notice was put in place was that his work was sub­standard and unsafe.

"For him to then breach that prohibition notice within weeks of it being put in place - and on the same day he met HSE who made it clear that he had not yet complied - shows he has ut­ter disregard for the law and for other people's safety."

Mr Morrell has recently changed his name by deed poll to Peter Michael Coltilda.

 

Plumber given suspended sentence

Penalty: Suspended sentence

A plumber has been given a suspended jail sentence after endangering the lives of Norwich homeowners

Frank Davey, 81 of Breckland Road, New Costessey, pleaded guilty at Norwich Magistrates' Court to breaching health and safety laws.

Magistrates imposed a three month jail sentence on Mr Davey, suspended for two years, and also banned him from working with electricity or gas for two years.

An HSE investigation found that Mr Davey carried out gas work and fitted new gas boilers at three houses in The Columbine, Mountfield Avenue and Stylman Road, all in Norwich, be­tween 1 April and 30 November 2009.

Mr Davey was not registered with the Gas Safe Register - a legal requirement for anyone carrying out such work. An inspection at each of the properties revealed his work was de­fective and dangerous. At one address a gas leak was discovered and had to be made safe.

Mr Davey admitted breaching Regulation 3(3) of the Gas Safety (Installation & Use) Regula­tions 1998 and Section 3(2) of the Health & Safety at Work etc. Act 1974. He was also or­dered to pay £1,000 in costs.

 

Other health and safety offences in brief

 

Defendants		Offences		Penalty		Description
A R Patel & C A Patel		Gas Safety (In­stallation and Use) Regula­tions 1998 regs 3(1), 3(3) and 36(3)		Total £6,000 + £1,800 costs £500		Replacing gas boiler when not competent or Gas Safe registered. Failure to provide landlord's certificate
WCM Europe Limited		S2(1) HSWA		£6,000 + £2,741 costs		Circular saw injury caused by missing guard
Sirane Limited		Reg11 PUWER		£6,000 + £2,083 costs		2 fingers amputated by automatic guillotine
Lambert Engi­neering Limited		S2(1) HSWA		£6,000 + £4,198 costs		Failure to use protective guards on machinery
Nuneaton and Bedworth Bor­ough Council	Reg 4(9)(c), & 11 CoAR 2006		£5,000 + £2,140 costs		Worker sent to repair leak without being told about presence of aib - which he cut with a saw.
Viewline North­west Limited	Reg6(3) Work at Height Regs 2005		£5,000 + £2,274 costs		Working at height without edge protection/guard rails
M McKernan	Reg6(3), reg 10(3) Work at Height Regs 2005		£2,000 + £2,000 costs		Working at height without edge protection/guard rails
Maplestead Lim­ited	S2(1) HSWA		£1,000 + £2,000 costs		Hand injury caused un­guarded spindle moulder

 

Environment Agency prosecutions

Swimming pool company fined after polluting river

Total fines £66,000

Biolab (UK) Limited, one of the UK's leading water and swimming pool chemical treatment companies, whose careless operational practices led to a major incident and decimated the entire fish population along an eight mile stretch of the River Coln, has been penalised £146,000.

Biolab (UK) Ltd pleaded guilty to two charges of failing to take all measures necessary to prevent a major accident, and to limit the consequences of such an accident, and causing pollution to the River Coln.

Gloucester Crown Court heard that the incident caused a large quantity of toxic chemicals to spill into the River Coln in Andoversford, Gloucestershire, killing over 2,500 fish and caus­ing major damage to the surrounding environment. The impact of the pollution was so severe it was estimated at the time that it would take years for the river to recover. The lat­est fish survey by the Environment Agency shows that fish stocks are getting healthier, but remain lower than pre incident levels in some locations.

On 4 September 2006 a large fire broke out at a unit in the Andoversford Industrial Estate, operated by Biolab, causing a large amount of chemicals such as chlorine to escape into the River Coln via the surface water drainage system. The fire destroyed the factory and the po­tent cocktail of chemicals caused a series of catastrophic explosions. This resulted in a huge chlorine based smoke plume extending for miles, which Thames Valley Police pilots could smell and see as far as Banbury, some 30 miles away in Oxfordshire. The A40 was closed for 24 hours, the entire industrial site was evacuated and several businesses in the area were closed for more than three days. A local resident who inhaled the smoke later claimed to have suffered from breathing difficulties. However, the Health Protection Agency stated that there would be no long term risks to public health.

Due to the severity of the incident a multi-agency response was launched involving; the En­vironment Agency, the Health Protection Agency, the Health and Safety Executive, Glouces­tershire Fire and Rescue Service, Gloucestershire Police, Cotswold District Council, Thames Water and Thames Valley Police. The scale of the pollution and damage was so large, the incident also required notification to the European Commission.

The pollution spread downstream for nearly eight miles and had a severe environmental im­pact, killing thousands of fish in its path, including the protected brown trout, as well as eel, salmon, roach, carp, bull head and lamprey populations. Prior to the incident, the River Coln was one of the best quality watercourses in Gloucestershire, and supported a vast amount of mature species of a high grade. A large number of water snails were found popped out of their shells due to the toxic mix of chemicals.

The court heard the major accident was a result of Biolab's failure to take all measures necessary to prevent this scale of incident and failing to limit the consequences of the spill. Biolab failed to have an adequate 'Major Accident Prevention Policy' and emergency plan in place, and to ensure its staff were adequately supported. Some of the consequences of the incident could have been avoided if Biolab had revised their plans as obligated by the regu­lations.

Environment Agency officers who investigated the incident found evidence that suggested that there were a number of steps the company should have taken to avoid and control the incident. These included having the correct infrastructure on site to capture any escaping chemicals and ensuring that the correct procedures were in place to manage such an inci­dent. Biolab also failed to hold the most recent copies of appropriate drainage plans. This meant the Environment Agency and other responders were unable to determine all path­ways of the pollution through the drainage system, allowing chemicals to continue discharg­ing for more than 24 hours after the initial spill.

The Environment Agency and HSE advised Biolab on how they could meet their obligations but the company failed to act as the business expanded. And despite company communica­tions, Biolab (UK) Ltd also failed to learn important lessons following a similar incident at the US parent company's factory near Atlanta, USA. Biolab(UK)'s ultimate controlling company is the US company, Chemtura Corporation. A fire at the factory of Chemtura subsidiary, Biolab Inc's, near Conyers, Georgia led to the pollution of local lakes and a number of compensa­tion claims in 2004.

Matt Carter, area manager at the Environment Agency, said: "Biolab (UK) Limited failed in their obligations by not continually assessing the risks their business posed to the environ­ment. The impact of this incident would have been reduced if Biolab had taken reasonable steps to control run-off from the site and had better accident plans in place.

"We are pleased that the court has recognised the gravity of this incident, and hope this will serve as a stark reminder to those companies who handle hazardous materials to make sure they have appropriate procedures in place to better protect their local environment and community, otherwise the consequences can be devastating.

The company was fined £66,000, a discount of one third for a guilty plea, £80,000 costs and a £15 victim surcharge.

 

Company fined for Heathrow groundwater pollution

Total fines £40,000

A London company responsible for supplying jet fuel at Heathrow Airport was fined £40,000 and ordered to pay the Environment Agency in excess of £14,000 for its costs, after severely polluting groundwater beneath the airport, with at least 139,000 litres of Jet A-1 aviation fuel.

Heathrow Hydrant Operating Company Limited (HHOpCo), of 8 York Road, London SE1 had pleaded guilty at Uxbridge Magistrates' Court in June this year to causing polluting matter to enter the Taplow Gravels groundwater, contrary to section 85 (1) and (6) of the Water Re­sources Act 1991. The case had been committed to Isleworth Crown Court for sentence.

The court heard that on 29 November 2007 HHOpCo informed the Environment Agency of a leak in the fuel supply pipeline to aircraft stands at Heathrow's Terminal One building. The leak was discovered by HHOpCo nine days earlier following an unrelated report from BAA about a report of jet fuel odour in a nearby access tunnel. Without this unrelated report, it is not known how long the leak would have continued to go undetected for. HHOpCo con­ducted an overnight pressure test on the hydrant system and confirmed the leak, but failed to notify the Environment Agency immediately.

On further investigation HHOpCo staff identified a valve chamber full of approximately 8,000 litres of aviation fuel. Once the valve chamber was emptied, fuel was seen leaking out of one of the attachments on the hydrant. Two bolts on the attachment were so badly cor­roded that they had caused the leak, which was estimated at the time of discovery to flow at 10 litres of fuel per minute. A later estimate corrected the leak to 7 litres per minute. It is not known how long the leak had been going on for or the total volume of fuel lost.

All bolts and valves on that section of pipeline were subsequently replaced to stop the leak. The section was pressure tested and returned to normal operation the following morning. The chamber in question has now been decommissioned.

HHOpCo attended an interview under caution at the Environment Agency office on the 12 March 2009. The company admitted during the interview that a £7 million automated leak detection system had been malfunctioning at the time and had not detected the leak. This was also indicated in HHOpCo's investigation report, which revealed that the leak detec­tion system was not working for at least five months prior to the Environment Agency being notified of the incident. The company did not put a manual testing system in place despite knowing that the automated system was not working properly.

It quickly became clear that jet fuel had been leaking for some time. A specialist remedia­tion company sank boreholes to recover fuel and remediate the affected area. As at June 2010 139,391 litres have been recovered and is still being recovered at a rate of 80-100 litres per week. The cost of remediation to date is approximately £1 million.

Mohammed Jama, the Environment Agency's lead officer on the case, said: "Heathrow Hydrant Operating Company's carelessness has led to the extensive pollution of groundwa­ter. Fortunately, to date, we have not seen any major impact to local rivers but jet fuel in groundwater has the potential to seriously harm the environment and water quality. The fine issued reflects the serious effect that HHOpCo's failures have had on the Taplow Gravels.

"Once groundwater becomes polluted it is very difficult to clean up. We hope that the fine issued will act as a prompt to HHOpCo and similar companies, reminding them of the impor­tance of compliance and making sure that their actions do not cause harm to or damage the environment. "

HHOpCo's contractors have been in charge of remediation and monitoring of the fuel plume and continue to provide updates to the Environment Agency.

 

Waste company given steep penalty for permit breach

Total fines £8,000

A waste company has been ordered to pay a total of £36,001 by magistrates after pleading guilty to breaching the conditions of its permit to run a Berkshire landfill site.

Grundon Waste Management Ltd operates the landfill site at a disused quarry at Star Lane, Knowle Hill, which takes around 60,000 tonnes of biodegradable commercial and industrial waste annually.

Bracknell Magistrates' Court heard that such sites can only operate legally if licensed by the Environment Agency.

Because of the nature of the site and its potential for harm to the environment, the Environ­ment Agency requires the operator to adhere strictly to the conditions of its permit. Poten­tial problems include polluting the water beneath the site and the risk of an explosion or a contribution to odours and green house gas emissions.

Waste arriving on the site is placed in layers to fill 'cells' which are specially engineered to minimise the impact on the environment.

One of the conditions of the waste permit is a stability risk assessment, which stipulates the steepness of slopes of cells which are being filled. If a cell is built too steeply then there is a risk the material behind the slope could cause the slope to collapse.

On this occasion Cell 5, in which work was started on in 2003, was built at a significantly steeper angle than the angle given in the slope stability documents submitted to the Envi­ronment Agency to gain the permit. The court found it was approximately one third steeper.

It appears Grundon Waste Management Ltd did not realise that it was being built at a steep­er angle and certainly did not bring it to the attention of the Environment Agency.

On 13 June 2007, when Cell 5 was nearing completion, Grundon Waste Management Ltd workers noticed cracks in the waste slope and near the top. These problems were immedi­ately brought to the attention of Environment Agency officers who visited the site later the same day.  Between the closure of the site at the end of that working day, and its opening the next day, Cell 5 suffered a slope failure, causing thousands of tonnes of waste on the side slope to slip with the collapsed wall, moving out more than 30 metres. Both the wall and waste contents of Cell 5 were displaced and exposed and the structure of the other cells affected.

Although investigated, the Environment Agency could not establish that in this case the ac­tual cause of the slope failure was because Grundon Waste Management Ltd built the slope at too steep an angle. However, Sailesh Mehta, for the prosecution, told the court that this is the sort of accident that the conditions of the permit are designed to prevent and demon­strates the importance of them.

Even though Grundon Waste Management Ltd remediated the slip, this took nearly two years and during that time there was an increased potential for problems such as gas emis­sions and odours owing to an increased operational area, as they had to tip the whole foot­print of the site to support the remaining waste in Cell 5.

It also took more than a year to prepare the site for the installation of additional infrastruc­ture to minimise emissions.

The number of odour complaints from neighbouring residents peaked after the slope fail­ure. Grundon Waste Management Ltd has now installed a number of measures including temporary capping, additional gas boreholes and a new flare to ensure the impact from the site is minimised and have changed their management systems to prevent a repeat of prob­lems on the site.

Environment officer Chris Mitchell said: "Not managing large landfill sites such as these properly, by ensuring that permit conditions are all being met, can cause damage to the environment and acute problems for people living nearby. Observing these conditions is extremely important.

"I'm pleased that the court has recognised the seriousness of this case and we hope that companies such as Grundon Waste Management Ltd will be able to learn important lessons from it in the future."

Grundon Waste Management Ltd was fined £8,000 and ordered to pay costs of £27,986. It also had to pay a £15 victim surcharge.

£26,500

 

Frozen dessert company fined for packaging offences

Total fines £20,000

A manufacturer of frozen desserts and cakes was ordered to pay £26,615.00 on 3 Septem­ber 2010 after failing to register as a producer of packaging waste, and recover and recycle packaging waste.

Rensow Patisserie Limited of Bridgeway House, Upper Icknield Way, Tring, Hertfordshire, HP23 4JX pleaded guilty at Watford Magistrates' Court to failing to register with the Environ­ment Agency or a compliance scheme as a producer of packaging waste, and failing to meet its requirements to recover and recycle packaging waste between 2003 and 2008.

The company was fined £20,000, and was ordered to pay £2,593 in costs to the Environ­ment Agency. The company was also ordered to pay compensation of £4,022 to the Agency for unpaid registration fees for the years 2003 to 2008 inclusive.

Rensow Patisserie Limited admitted that it failed to register with the Environment Agency or a compliance scheme and provide evidence that it recovered and recycled the packaging waste it handled, including paper, glass, plastic and ceramic packaging.

The Environment Agency contacted the company as part of its routine monitoring of non-regulated sites requesting information about the packaging material it handled. The infor­mation provided showed that the company should be registered as a producer of packaging waste as it met both thresholds by handing more than 50 tonnes of packaging per year, with an annual turnover of more than £2 million.

By not registering with the Environment Agency or a compliance scheme, it was estimated that Rensow Patisserie Limited made a saving of approximately £22,7426.26.

A director of Rensow Patisserie Limited attended an interview under caution on 10 Decem­ber 2008, and confirmed that the company exceeded the thresholds for turnover and ton­nage.

Environment officer Helen Pavlou said: "The regulations are in place to encourage a reduc­tion in the amount of packaging used by businesses and to decrease the disposal of waste to landfill. Although these regulations have been in force since 1997 many businesses still ignore or remain unaware of their responsibilities. We hope this case will highlight the need for other businesses to consider whether they are obligated under the Packaging Regula­tions." The money that Rensow Patisserie Ltd has saved by not purchasing packaging recovery notes would have directly supported the recycling industry."

Ed - The Producer Responsibility (Packaging Waste) Regulations were originally implement­ed in 1997 as a result of the EU Packaging Directive. The regulations are designed to make companies assess the amount of packaging they use and, where possible, limit the amount used. For the packaging remaining, companies have a responsibility to invest in the recycling industry.

The amount of recovery and recycling is dependent on the type of activity the company per­forms on the packaging and the tonnage handled. As the majority of companies are unable to take back their packaging, a system was set up whereby they purchase Packaging Recov­ery Notes (PRNs) or Packaging Export Recovery Notes (PERNs) to the value of their obliga­tion. The money from these PRNs/PERNs is used by the reprocessors of the packaging to improve the efficiency of their process, to expand their facilities, and assist with the funding of domestic recycling schemes, etc.

Under the Producer Responsibility Obligations (Packaging Waste) Regulations 2007, busi­nesses that have an annual turnover in excess of £2 million and handle more than 50 tonnes of packaging each year must be registered with the Environment Agency or a compliance scheme. Each year, obligated businesses must also provide evidence of payment for the recovery and recycling of packaging waste to offset the packaging they send out with their products that will eventually become waste.

The regulations make businesses take responsibility for the packaging waste they produce by making them pay towards overall recovery and recycling costs. This should lead to a re­duction in packaging, greater recycling and recovery and a decrease in the amount of pack­aging that ends up in landfill sites.

 

Company boss fined for failing to remove stockpile of waste

Total fines £10,000

South Devon businessman Anthony Small has been ordered to pay £13,500 in fines and costs for failing to remove thousands of tonnes of waste from a site near Newton Abbot

The offence occurred at Ruby Farm, Abbotskerswell where Anthony Small was co-director of Ruby Waste Management Ltd. The company operated a waste transfer station and recycling facility at the site that had previously been a landfill. At its height, Ruby Farm was one of the biggest waste transfer stations in the area handling around 45,000 tonnes of waste a year.

A waste transfer station sorts mixed waste into different types which are then re-cycled or sent to landfill. Inert and non-hazardous waste is shredded and sieved. The resulting waste material is known as 'fines'. This process reduces bulk and makes it easier for operators to dispose of waste at landfill.

The Environment Agency served a notice on Ruby Waste Management Ltd requiring the company to remove a large pile of illegally deposited 'fines' from an adjacent field by August 1, 2008. These fines had been causing water pollution and odour problems.

The Environment Agency contacted Anthony Small who said disposal of the waste fines was under way and that they were being removed to the landfill site at Heathfield. However, when Agency officers returned to Ruby Farm they discovered that instead of being legally disposed of, the fines had simply been moved to the waste transfer station.

A volumetric survey of waste stored on the transfer station showed there were 6,490 cubic metres of waste fines being stored at the site on August 1, 2008. This was more than 20 times above the permitted limit.

'The amount of material stored at Ruby Farm grossly exceeded what was allowed under the permit for this site and had the potential to cause further pollution. The defendant had ample opportunity to remove and safely dispose of this waste, but chose to ignore the advice he received and exhibited an obstructive and dismissive attitude towards authorities. We were left with no choice other than to prosecute', said Richard Cloke for the Environ­ment Agency.

Appearing at Exeter Crown Court this week (September 6), Anthony Small of St Mary's Park, Collaton St Mary, Stoke Gabriel, Devon was fined £10,000 and ordered to pay £3,500 costs after pleading guilty to, between July 30 and August 8, 2008, storing more than 700 tonnes of controlled waste at Ruby Farm contrary to Regulation 41 (1)(a) of the Environmental Per­mitting Regulations.

Ruby Waste Management Lt went into liquidation and ceased trading in 2009.

 

Barratt Homes fined for polluting stream with sewage

Total fines £10,000

Barratt Homes have been ordered to pay more than £13,400 in fines and costs after sewage escaped from a housing development and polluted a stream close to the Tamar Valley

On September 2, 2009 a member of the public reported to the Agency that a stream run­ning through their garden was discoloured and smelt of sewage. An officer visited the prop­erty and saw sewage fungus growing on the bed of a stream that flows into a tributary of the River Tamar.

The pollution was later traced to a housing development at Calcos Place, Station Road, Kelly Bray near Callington where Barratt Homes had built 84 new homes. Sewage from the prop­erties is stored in holding tanks before being pumped to a South West Water gravity sewer prior to treatment.

Agency officers could smell sewage and saw liquid seeping out of a bank beside the sewage tanks and pumping station when they arrived at the site to carry out an inspection. Checks by the Environment Agency showed the new development's pumping station had failed causing sewage to overflow from a collection chamber onto the ground and into a nearby stream.

When Barratt Homes were interviewed, it became apparent the pollution resulted from a misunderstanding between the defendant company and a third party that took over the maintenance and monitoring of the pumping station in July 2009. When the pollution oc­curred, telemetry required for the monitoring was not in place.

It was unclear who was responsible for the monitoring of the pumping station until such time as the telemetry was installed. The absence of any monitoring meant nobody knew there had been a mechanical failure and that sewage was spilling out of the pumping sta­tion and polluting a stream.

'We estimate sewage escaped intermittently for at least two weeks. This would have had a serious effect on water quality in the stream. It was avoidable and resulted through a lack proper monitoring,' said Louise Weller for the Environment Agency.

'Barratt Homes are a national house builder. They are well aware of the potential impact their activities can have on watercourses. In this case, the failure to ensure an adequate sys­tem of monitoring was in place resulted in a stream being polluted,' said Louise Weller.

Barratt Homes (Exeter Division) was fined £10,000 and ordered to pay £3,448 costs by Bod­min magistrates after pleading guilty to causing noxious or polluting matter to enter con­trolled waters between August 31, 2009 and September 11, 2009 contrary to Section 85(1) and 85(6) of the Water Resources Act 1991. The case was heard on September 7.

 

Haulage contractor fined for waste offences

Total fines £3,000

A North Devon haulier has been ordered to pay £13,000 in fines and costs for illegally de­positing and storing waste at sites in and around Ilfracombe. The case was brought by the Environment Agency.

On April 17, 2008 an Agency officer visited the Old Gasworks Yard, Hele Bay, Ilfracombe and saw piles of waste including scrap metal, wood, stone, fridges and crushed cars. The site op­erator, Paul Crabb, was told he could not deposit waste at the site without an environmental permit. He was issued with a formal written warning.

On February 17, 2009 a large pile of waste rubble and bricks was found at Lee Meadow Farm, formally known as Carrick Farm, Shaftesbury Lane, Ilfracombe. It had been left by Paul Crabb's haulage business. The defendant was asked to provide waste transfer notes for the waste deposited at this site. He failed to respond.

On June 1, 2009 an Agency officer returned to the Old Gasworks Yard to speak to Paul Crabb. Despite the earlier warning, new wastes including plastics, polystyrene, treated wood, plasterboard, fibreglass insulation, guttering, bituminous roofing felt and cement packaging was at the site.

The court heard the defendant's haulage yard lacked the necessary facilities to ensure its waste operations didn't cause pollution or excessive noise dust or smells and did not have a permit for the activities.

The Environment Agency also discovered that a 'substantial amount' of waste hardcore had been taken to Honeycleave Farm, Mullacott. Although this site had permission to use waste hardcore for construction purposes, the deposits were not recorded in accordance with the regulations.

'The defendant chose to ignore the Agency's advice and operate illegally despite repeated warnings and left the Agency no option but to prosecute him. His customers had a duty of care to ensure that their waste was dealt with properly and he put them at risk of enforce­ment action by his behaviour. His decision not to use Waste Transfer notes makes it impossi­ble for us to trace where some of these wastes, including those containing hazardous sub­stances, ended up and whether they were dealt with properly. We would urge the public and companies to take care with their waste and to contact the Agency for free advice if they are not sure that it is being dealt with correctly, ' said Sean McKay for the Environment Agency.

Appearing before Exeter Crown Court, Paul Crabb, of Claremont House, Lawn Place, Ilfra­combe, Devon was fined £3,000 and ordered to pay £10,000 costs after pleading guilty to five offences including depositing and keeping controlled waste without an environmental permit, failing to produce waste transfer notes and failing his duty of care as a transporter of waste. These are offences under the Environmental Protection Act 1990 and Environmen­tal Permitting Regulations 2007.

 

First UK prosecution for WEEE producer

Total fines £20,150

Hairdressing supplies wholesaler Aston and Fincher Ltd of Pavilion Drive, Birmingham has pleaded guilty to 31 charges relating to failure to comply with packaging waste regulations and failing to register as a producer of electrical and electronic waste

By failing to comply with the packaging regulations, the company avoided paying approxi­mately £10,900. By failing to comply with the Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) Directive, the company avoided paying £445 plus unknown costs of financing the recovery and recycling of waste equipment for which they would have been responsible in 2008. This gave them an unfair competitive advantage compared to those businesses that have com­plied with legislation.

The charges were brought by the Environment Agency under the Producer Responsibility legislation. Aston and Fincher Ltd was fined £650 for each offence (a total of £20,150). It was also ordered to pay compensation of £7,135 to the Environment Agency for loss of reg­istration fees, costs of £3,605.11 and a victim surcharge of £15.

For the Environment Agency, Jill Crawford told the court that Aston and Fincher is a whole­saler of hairdressing supplies and sundries, operating from 26 warehouse sites in the UK.

Producer Responsibility for packaging and WEEE exists to ensure that businesses take on responsibility for recovering and recycling a proportion of waste electrical products and packaging waste. The packaging regulations have been in force since 1997 and have con­tributed to the doubling of the amount of packaging waste recycled in the UK, which is now 60%. This equates to 6.6 million tonnes of packaging waste being diverted from landfill into recycling each year.

The regulations demand that companies who handle packaging as manufacturers, pack fill­ers, sellers, importers or leasing companies are registered each year and provide evidence that they have recycled packaging.

The Environment Agency investigations found that Aston and Fincher Ltd had committed of­fences in each year from 2001 to 2008.

The company also imported a range of electrical items into the UK, and failed to meet their obligations under the WEEE Regulations. This legislation came into force in 2007, and this is the first case of prosecution of a producer of electrical equipment under these regulations.

The offences were discovered as a result of routine investigation work by the Environment Agency. The company admitted all the offences put to them.

Speaking after the case Hannah Wooldridge, an Environment Agency officer leading in the investigation, said: "this is the first prosecution of a business for offences under both the packaging regulations and the similar producer responsibility legislation for electrical equip­ment. It should send a strong message out to all companies who do have producer respon­sibility obligations to ensure that they comply with the legal requirements placed on them. We will continue to enforce these regulations, using our resources to target high risk areas. These regulations do not set out to criminalise companies who don't comply; they are about making all producers responsible for their impact on the environment, and helping them to reduce it wherever possible.

"These regulations can help companies focus on wasteful practices, which can result in sig­nificant cost savings. We have seen numerous examples where companies have rethought their packaging requirements and as a result reduced their packaging obligations.

"While registering would have cost less than £11,000 for the years concerned, their appear­ance in court has cost them well over £30,000. This case demonstrates that flouting the law does not pay.

"We will continue to work with responsible businesses to reduce the amounts of packaging and electrical waste ending up in landfills, but we will also work hard to seek out and pros­ecute companies who fail to meet their obligations. We've run a number of seminars and also a radio campaign across the Midlands highlighting the WEEE regulations and their re­quirements to assist companies in understanding producer responsibility and how it affects them.

"Companies who don't comply with the regulations unfairly exploit those that do and we want to help businesses operate on a level playing field, particularly in these difficult eco­nomic times. Legal compliance including environmental regulation should be high on the agenda for company management, and this company have paid a heavy price for failing to recognise this'.

In mitigation, the company secretary, David Winnington, said that it was not a deliberate intention to evade the regulations. The company was simply not aware of them. They are now fully compliant with both regulations and they pleaded guilty at the first available op­portunity.

 

North East haulage firm fined £10,000 over beck pollution

Total fines £10,000

A haulage company has been fined a total of £10,000 after a toxic chemical leaked from one of its lorries and turned the water in a beck blue.

At Darlington Magistrates' Court Nicholsons Transport Limited ("Nicholsons") and driver Nigel John Draper each pleaded guilty to a charge of causing a wood preservative to enter a tributary of Shotton Beck at Sedgefield, County Durham, in June last year.

The company, of Burnside House, ICI West Gate, Chilton's Avenue, Billingham, was fined £10,000 and ordered to pay Environment Agency costs of £1,875. Draper, 43, of Pear Tree House, Newbiggin, Richmond, North Yorkshire, drove the lorry at the time of the incident and was fined £300 and ordered to pay costs of £330.

Trevor Cooper, prosecuting for the Environment Agency, said the spill happened on 19 June 2009 at the roundabout between the A177 and the A689 near Sedgefield, next to a Little Chef restaurant.

Environment officers were alerted by the fire service and viewed CCTV footage from the Little Chef, which showed the liquid had come from a curtain-sided truck.

Police traced the vehicle to Nicholsons and discovered that Draper had been driving it that morning. The lorry was carrying a bulk container with about 1,000 litres of liquid wood pre­servative inside.

Mr Cooper said the container had become punctured and liquid escaped.

Environment officers described seeing a "large amount" of dark blue liquid along the kerb­side for up to 70m and there were also stains on the grass verge.

The court heard the liquid ran into roadside drains and from there entered a tributary of Shotton Beck. An 80-metre stretch of the watercourse beyond the A177 also was dark blue in colour.

Environment officers identified the liquid as Wolmanit CX 8, an alkaline which is used to treat wood and is toxic to aquatic life, however the court heard that no fish were killed in this incident.

Safety advice to carriers states the chemical is corrosive, dangerous for the environment, and should not be discharged into drains or soil.

They took samples from the watercourse and found hazardous chemicals were present.

Mr Cooper said the fire service contacted Nicholsons and the company arranged for con­tractors to pump out the polluted water and tanker it away for disposal, at a cost of more than £9,000.

He said the road had to be closed because of the spillage, with potential disruption to local businesses.

When Draper was interviewed, he said he was covering a different route from his usual work and did not know what liquid was in containers on the back of the lorry. He said as he overtook a transit van something sticking out from it caught the side of his lorry, tearing the curtain and puncturing the container.

Draper said he stopped and saw liquid on the verge but could not open the box contain­ing equipment to contain leaks. He had called Nicholsons and was told to use shrink wrap around the hole but could not find any. He then drove back to the company's depot.

During interview, Nicholsons estimated about 700 litres of Wolmanit CX 8 had been lost. The company said Draper was a trained driver but had not mentioned a spillage when he reported damage to the lorry.  Mr Cooper said the failure of either defendant to notify the Environment Agency of the spill was an aggravating feature, as was the lack of action they took to contain the liquid.

The court heard there had been an impact on the watercourse and there had been potential for financial loss to neighbouring businesses because of the road closure.

In mitigation, the magistrates heard that since the incident the company had put in new procedures to be followed by all drivers in the event of a spillage. Once the company, which has a turnover of £2.5 million a year, had become aware of the pollution it arranged for the affected part of the beck to be pumped out by contractors. This was completed on the same day as the incident.

Barrister Mr William Byrne, acting on behalf of Draper, said his client was unaware that his load was hazardous and the spillage had been a "pure accident".

He said Draper had tried his best to contain the spillage, and "had ended up covered in the material." As a result of this incident, he said that his client had been dismissed for gross misconduct .

Neither defendant had a previous record for environmental offences and both had fully co-operated with the Environment Agency investigation.

The bench gave both Nicholsons and Draper credit for early guilty pleas.

Speaking after the court case, environment management team leader for the Environment Agency Andrew Turner said: "This court case shows that everyone is responsible for the protection of the environment. Carriers of potentially harmful chemicals need to be extra vigilant and ensure that the appropriate authorities are notified immediately if there is a spillage."

 

Car breaker prosecuted for operating without a permit.

Total fines £10,000

A site owner and his tenant, the operator of a car breakers site in Rainham, have been sen­tenced at court after their illegal activities caused at least four fires and allowed car parts to fall in the river close to Rainham Marshes.

Festus Odonowo was given a 12-month community service order and ordered to do unpaid work for 100 hours after he pleaded guilty on 18 August 2010 to three offences:1. Causing the deposit of controlled waste including vehicles and vehicle parts on the land at 2b Ferry Lane South, Rainham when there was no management licence in force 2. Treating the waste without a waste management licence and 3. Operating a regulated facility without an environmental permit.

John Palmer, the owner of the site, pleaded guilty on 20 August 2010 to the offence of knowingly permitting the deposit of controlled waste, namely vehicles and vehicles parts, at the site when there was no waste management licence in force. He was fined £10,000 and ordered to pay prosecution costs of £17,000.  Basildon Crown Court heard that Mr Odonowo operated an illegal car breakers yard at the site, where infrastructure was completely inadequate for that type of operation. The ac­tivities on the site posed a significant risk to the local environment and caused a number of fires. Parts and engines, which should have been stored on impermeable surface with adequate drainage, were left on unprepared ground which meant that oil would seep into the earth. Vehicles and car parts were not stored safely and often fell over the site boundary into the local brook.

During an interview under caution, Mr Odonowo said his business involved receiving pollut­ed waste vehicles and breaking them up on site so that some of the parts could be exported to Africa. The oils and coolant were disposed of in the drain outside the site.

Mr Palmer owned part of the site since 16th August 2006, and the rest in 2008, and rented the land to Festus Odonowo who carried out the illegal activities. Mr Palmer was made aware of the illegal activities by the Environment Agency and was present on some of the occasions when the Environment Agency visited the site. He failed to attend an inter­view with the Environment Agency about the site.

Between 2005 and 2008, the Environment Agency served various notices to both Mr Palmer and Mr Odonowo to halt the car breaking activities on the site, to no avail.. The unregulated activities caused severe disruption to neighbouring business especially when the Fire Bri­gade had to be called out to deal with fires at the site. This case was assisted by a co- ordi­nated multi-agency operation in June 2008. The operator has ceased all waste activities at the site. The waste vehicles and car parts have been cleared from the site although a con­siderable amount of tyres still remain on the site. Environmental crime officer, Kim Egbokhan said: "The sentences of the court send a clear message to illegal operators that the courts will not tolerate violations of the environmental regulations..Cars contain liquids which have the potential to harm the environment if they are not disposed of correctly. We issue environmental permits for car breakers so that we can work with them to ensure they operate in a way that won't harm the environment. Sites that do not have environmental permits are a real threat to our environment and human health.

"This site was close to Rainham Marshes nature reserve and so posed a very real threat to the natural environment. The fact that vehicle parts fell into the brook meant that there was also a risk of contamination even further afield, as contaminants could be swept down­stream of the site by the flowing water.

"The fires that occurred on site were further proof of the dangers associated with these sorts of illegal operations."

 

Wine company fined for waste packaging offences

Total fines £4,500

De Bortoli Wines UK Ltd supply wine to retailers and wholesalers from a premises at Farn­ham near Blandford, Dorset. Wines are imported from a parent company in Australia to a bonded warehouse where it is distributed to customers. The packaging is mainly glass bot­tles and cardboard boxes.

Any business handling more than 50 tonnes of packaging a year with an annual turnover of more than £2 million is required, under the Packaging Regulations, to recover and recycle a percentage of any packaging waste they've produced.

A company must comply with the Regulations by either registering with the Environment Agency or signing up to a Compliance Scheme by April 7 each year and providing data on the tonnage of packaging handled.

The aim of the Packaging Regulations is to encourage businesses to take responsibility for packaging used in their operations and reduce the amount of waste going to landfill.

Businesses are not required to physically recover and recycle the packaging themselves, but pay accredited waste handling organisations to do the recycling on their behalf.

On May 15, 2009 the Environment Agency contacted De Bortoli Wines to ascertain whether the company needed to register. Information supplied by the company showed it was in breach of the Regulations for the years 2005, 2006 and 2007. By not registering it had avoid­ed paying costs and fees estimated at £5,022.

'It is important businesses handling packaging register with the Agency or join a compliance scheme as this helps with recycling and reduces the amount of waste going to landfills,' said Tessa Bowering for the Environment Agency.

De Bortoli Wines UK Ltd was fined a total of £4,500 by Weymouth magistrates on Thurs­day (September 9) after pleading guilty to nine offences under the Producer Responsibility Obligation (Packaging Waste) Regulations including failing to register, failing to recover and recycle packaging waste and failing to furnish a certificate of compliance. The company was also ordered to pay £2,128 costs and compensation of £1,686.

 

Foamy stream fine

Total fines £8,000

Glentham Farming Company Ltd was fined £8,000 and ordered to pay £4,321 at Lincoln Magistrates Court for discharging grossly polluting effluent - a mix of trade effluent, land drainage and yard drainage - into an unnamed tributary of Seggimoor Beck.

Miss Claire Bentley, prosecuting, said the Environment Agency had received a report on 2 March 2010 that a stream on the Bishop Norton Road, south west of Barff Farm, was cov­ered in foam. Officer Helen Woodall traced the pollution to a pipe coming from the farm. There was no other source of water flowing into the stream, which is connected to the Nor­ton Beck and River Ancholme.

On 3 March, Environment Officer James Brackenbury attended the incident and saw a milky-coloured liquid coming from the pipe. Beneath it was a build-up of white foam. He also noted the stream looked as though it had been recently dredged downstream of the pipe.  Miss Bentley said: "He followed the stream downstream into the village and continued to observe discolouration and a foamy scum on the surface of the water. He also observed that the water discharging into Seggimoor Beck from the stream looked grey in comparison to the clearer water of the beck.

"On 19 March, Ms Woodall returned to the discharge pipe and observed that there was a lot of froth and sediment visible in the stream."

A biological survey carried out on 3 March found a large number of dead freshwater worms immediately downstream of the discharge pipe and indicated very poor water quality. The water was blackened, had a strong odour and a extensive build up of foam.

A sample taken 450 metres downstream of the pipe found the water still had foam on the surface and widespread sewage fungus. Sewage fungus is a complex community of fungi, bacteria and protozoa which usually forms slimy, furry growths on solid surfaces such as wa­ter plants. Its presence indicates long-term organic pollution. The sample results indicated poor water quality.

The biologist concluded that the discharge had a severely negative impact on macro-inver­tebrate fauna in the tributary of Seggimoor Beck with the effect still apparent 450 metres downstream. The presence of the sewage fungus indicated that the pipe had been discharg­ing for at least a number of days.

James Barton, Managing Director of Glentham Farming Company Ltd, told Environment Agency officers that the company had increased its potato peeling work since February 2010 meaning more effluent was generated. He said the settlement tanks were unable to cope with the additional volume.

Mr Barton also said the company did not carry out routine checks of the stream and was not aware a permit was needed to discharge trade effluent.

Since the incident Glentham Farming Company Ltd has blocked the outlet to the first settle­ment tank so that effluent no longer discharges into the stream. Instead, it is contained in a tanker and spread on surrounding land owned by the company. The discharge pipe still drains surface water from the yard and land to the stream via a header pipe.

The company has also dredged the stream and wants to look into re-circulating or recycling of effluent.

However, the court heard, on 9 August 2010 Ms Woodall returned to check the discharge pipe and found that a further offence had been committed. The officer observed white froth in the stream, a sample result revealed that grossly polluting effluent was still being discharged. Mr Barton believed that the pollution was being caused by water in surround­ing land drains which was flushing through residual trade effluent in the drainage pipe.

Following this visit Mr Barton arranged for the drain to be jetted to remove any residual trade effluent. 

 

Fined for burning illegal waste

Total fines £5,000

During a prosecution of Mr West Bedford Magistrates' Court heard that carpet from a mar­quee business had been burned at his Long Lost Farm along with plastics, green waste and woods.

West came to the attention of the Environment Agency on 2 December 2009, when reports were made of burning at the farm. Investigating officers found plastic soil pipe and adhesive tube being burned with wood and tree loppings and advised West that plastics should not be burned.

Nine days later, while investigating a further report of burning, they saw dark smoke coming from a fire on the farm close to the River Ouse and another on the site of the previous fire, Mrs Sarah Nicholson told the court. "There was a distinct smell of burning plastic or rubber in the air."

The larger of the two fires was about five by six metres and one metre high at the centre, the main bulk of which appeared to be rolls of thin foam-backed synthetic carpet, the court was told.

"The carpet was smouldering and occasionally flaring up giving off noxious smoke," said Mrs Nicholson. "The officers phoned West and asked if he knew anything about the fire, but he did not."

A day later the officers drove past and saw that the fire was still smouldering.

West later told officers that he had lit the fire but did not know there was any carpet in it as he had taken the carpet there a long time ago and it had been buried underneath other waste.

Evidence from nearby farmers and others was that West had more recently taken carpet onto site, Mrs Nicholson told the court. West said he took carpet waste from a marquee business he was involved with to a legitimate site in Wellingborough - the site operators had no record of any such deliveries of waste to any of their sites.

Mrs Nicholson told magistrates that the burning of carpet, plastics and treated wood can cause harm to human health or pollution to the environment.

After the hearing Environment Agency officer Jeremy Hay said: "Emissions from fires such as these are likely to include toxic substances such as hydrogen chloride, sulphur dioxide, carbon monoxide and hydrogen cyanide.

"Had Mr West listened to our advice nine days previously he could have avoided being convicted and fined. However, we will always endeavour to prosecute those who flagrantly breach environmental legislation - it is there to protect our environment."

West pleaded guilty to: On or about 11 December 2009, on land at Long Last Farm, 6 East End, Pavenham, Bedford,

Bedfordshire you did keep, treat or dispose of controlled waste, namely treated wood, plas­tic and carpet, in a manner likely to cause pollution of the environment or harm to human health.

 

Transport company in deep water

Total fines £4,000

A Surrey transport company has been ordered to pay a total of £6,867 after pleading guilty to polluting a stretch of the River Thames with oil. VK Transport, whose registered address is Crosslands Road, West Ewell, was fined £4,000 and ordered to pay £2,852 costs, plus a £15 victim surcharge, by magistrates. The company faced one charge under Section 85 of the Water Resources Act 1991.

Kingston Magistrates' Court heard that around 40 swans were affected by the pollution, which entered the River Thames in Kingston on July 14 2008. Members of the public in­formed Environment Agency officers that a large amount of oil could be seen on the Thames and a patrol boat was sent to investigate.

It was confirmed later the same day that the pollution was entering the river from a surface water sewer at Westfield Landing, off Portsmouth Road in Kingston, and that it had collect­ed around a number of boats on a 500 metre downstream stretch. The Environment Agency attempted to clear up the pollution by placing oil absorbent booms around the area where the fuel was entering the river.

Following a detailed inspection of the area's surface water system, with help from Thames Water Utilities Ltd, the pollution was traced to an address in Lower Marsh Lane, Kingston. This address is leased by the defendant and was the source of the pollution.

Environment Agency officer Peter Ehmann took oil samples from the site, which was being used as a vehicle maintenance yard. The site had an oil interceptor, which is designed to stop small spillages of oil from leaving the site. However it was so full of oil that it could not function properly causing thick black waste engine oil to run in to the surface water sewer system. The company admitted in court that it had failed to empty the interceptor, which meant the interceptor failed to operate properly.

The surface water sewer system was confirmed to be linked directly to the outfall at West­field Landing where oil was seen discharging the previous day. Samples taken of the oil discharging from this large outfall from behind the boom were analysed and shown to be consistent with the oil found at 56b Lower Marsh Lane.

Approximately 40 swans were affected by oil and the worst cases had to be rescued by the Swan Sanctuary in Shepperton. In his opinion a trustee of the sanctuary said had these swans not been rescued and treated, the worst affected would have died from swallowing the oil or the oil would have stopped their feathers being waterproof and they would have died of hypothermia.

Staff from the Environment Agency visited the site on 15 August 2008 and no more oil could be seen around the outfall, or further downstream, and the booms were removed.

Environment officer Peter Ehmann said: "This incident resulted in significant damage to lo­cal wildlife and the general area. We were confronted with an unpleasant scene when we first arrived.

"Although a number of swans had to be rescued and cared for by the local swan sanctuary, it was fortunate that the pollution didn't result in any fish mortality. Irresponsible handling of oil and disposing of oil down drains is totally unacceptable and we are pleased that the court has recognised this."

 

Roofing contractor dumped asbestos waste in a field

Total fines £3,600

A Wellington roofer and two accomplices have been ordered to pay more than £3,600 in fines and costs for illegally dumping a trailer load of waste asbestos roofing tiles in the Som­erset countryside

Andrew Disney, who trades as Disney Roofing, was caught after packaging containing his home address was found among waste dumped in a stubble field at Boomer Farm, North Petherton. The farm lies within The Quantock Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

The farmer was alerted by a friend who told him one of his fields had been targeted by fly-tippers. The waste included old asbestos tiles, drainpipes, wood and plastic. The farmer reported the incident to Sedgemoor District Council and handed over a box with Disney's home address on it.

On October 2, 2009 two police officers went to 88 Springfield Road, Wellington and arrested Disney on suspicion of depositing controlled waste without a licence. They were accompa­nied by officers from the Environment Agency's environmental crime team.

Information obtained from Disney during questioning implicated two other men, Gareth Bright and Andrew Bryant, in the crime. When interviewed Disney and Bright said they borrowed Bryant's van to transport the waste to Boomer Farm using a trailer belonging to Disney.

Samples of waste taken from the field were analysed and found to contain white and brown asbestos - a hazardous substance that must be disposed of at a licensed site. The waste had come from a site in the Blagdon Hill area of Taunton.

Disney had earlier hired a skip to legally dispose of any hazardous waste, but it had been re­moved by contractors before all the asbestos roof tiles and drainpipes the from the roofing job at Taunton had been cleared. It was this surplus waste that was dumped.

'Fly-tipping is not only a blight on the landscape, it also damages wildlife habitats and can pose a risk to human health. It is especially important hazardous wastes like asbestos are disposed of safely. We are determined to bring offenders to justice by working in close partnership with the police and local authorities. The public can play an important role by reporting any fly-tipping incidents they see,' said Glyn Sewell for the Environment Agency.

Appearing before Bridgwater magistrates Andrew Disney was ordered to pay £1,844 costs and given a 12 month community order requiring him to carry out 150 hours of unpaid work. Gareth Bright of 5 Churchfields, Wellington was ordered to pay £922 costs and or­dered to carry out 100 hours unpaid work under a 12 month community order. Andrew Bry­ant, also of 5 Churchfields, Wellington, was fined £300 and ordered to pay £285 costs.

 

Waste site prosecuted for breaching permit conditions

Penalty: Suspended prison sentence

A father and son who operated a waste site at Arch Street, Bolton have received suspended prison sentences for flouting environmental regulations. Michael and Mark Rogers were each given an eight week prison sentence suspended for two years, 200 hours unpaid work and have each been ordered to pay costs of £3,642.05 to the Environment Agency.

Bolton Magistrates heard that between 1 May and 28 October 2009 Environment Agency Officers visited AWR Rent a Skips Ltd's site at Arch Street, Bolton on 11 occasions. They found up to three times more waste on site than the company was allowed to have. The site's permit authorised it to accept up to 1000 tonnes of household, commercial and in­dustrial waste, however during this period up to approximately 3000 tonnes of waste was seen on site. Despite repeated requests, and enforcement notices, to reduce the quantity of waste, they continued to bring material on to site. The site also suffered from a fly infesta­tion which affected neighbouring properties and resulted in complaints from members of the public.

Simon Oldfield, Environment Management Team Leader for the Environment Agency said, "The actions of AWR Rent a Skip Ltd, showed a deliberate and intentional disregard for the environment. The company directors were fully aware of the legal requirements for the site and were given a number of opportunities to comply with their permit.

"The failure to operate within permit limits created a risk of harm to the environment and impacted on the neighbouring area and local residents. It also created an unfair advantage over other operators who do operate with the conditions of their own permits."

 

Company director sentenced

Penalty: two year conditional discharge

On 27 August 2010, Edward O'Neill, of Blacksmiths Close, Nether Broughton, Melton Mow­bray pleaded guilty to three charges relating to the illegal dumping, keeping and shredding of tyres.

The 57 old was estimated to have benefited by over £325,000 as a result of his illegal ac­tivities. He was sentenced to a two year conditional discharge and ordered to pay costs of £1,500.  Counsel for Prosecution, Romilly Edge, told the court that the defendant was the director of Robin Hood Environmental Ltd, a company that owned and operated a waste disposal site at Oakfield Lane, Warsop. The site was located next to a vacant plot of land owned by Notting­hamshire County Council. The land owned by the Council did not have a waste management licence but the defendant took possession of this land and used it as a waste disposal site by depositing, keeping and treating waste tyres on site, in contravention of section 33 Environ­mental Protection Act 1990.

Between January 2007 and August 2008 the Environment Agency carried out regular site inspections. On a site visit on 7 September 2007 the defendant was first advised by the En­vironment Agency that he was unlawfully storing tyres on unlicensed land. He subsequently was informed on numerous occasions that he was operating the site against the law and that he needed to obtain a waste management licence for the land owned by the Council. He was also asked to remove tyres from the land, but these requests were never complied with.

During a site visit conducted by Environment Agency officers on 31 January 2008 Mr O'Neill was interviewed under caution and stated that he believed that he owned the land, that tyres had been deposited on this land for over 20 years and that he believed that the this land was covered by a waste management licence.

At no time over the prosecution period was a waste management licence ever sought or obtained for the land owned by Nottinghamshire County Council. In particular, Mr O'Neill made no attempt to secure a Waste Management Licence after the Environment Agency informed him that such a licence was required.

On 29 May 2009 the site occupied by Robin Hood Environmental Ltd caught fire, requiring Nottinghamshire Fire and Rescue Services to be on site until 3 June.

Speaking after the case David Brown, Lead Officer for the Environment Agency's investiga­tion, said: "It is important that sites comply with the rules and regulations. Where compa­nies choose to ignore these rules we will take action through the courts. We have worked together with our partners in Mansfield District Council to show that neither organisation will allow companies to threaten the environment or place the public at risk. Had this com­pany still being in existence the penalties would have been far greater. Other companies and individuals should take careful note of this and follow the rules."

In mitigation Counsel for Defence, Tim Green, said that the defendant had been misled by a surveyors' report that mistakenly indicated that the defendant's company owned the Coun­cil's land. Mr Green admitted that the defendant had failed to take any steps to remove the tyres when he had been informed of this error. He informed the court that Mr O'Neill's reluctance to remove the tyres was due in part to his frustration with his advisors but also because the defendant had hoped to reclaim and recycle the tyres for fuel. The court was informed that when the business failed, the defendant lost all of his savings. The court was shown a copy of the misleading surveyor's report and a statement of the defendant's means.

His Honour Judge Milmo QC sentenced the defendant to a two year conditional discharge. In doing so he observed that had the defendant been a company with substantial assets then the appropriate sentence would have been a significant fine but he noted that the defendant's company, Robin Hood Environmental Ltd, is in liquidation and the defendant is now dependant on benefits. In reaching this decision the judge noted that he must take account of the defendant's means in passing sentence and determined that it would be preferable that Mr O'Neill make a contribution of £1,500 to the prosecution costs (to the Environment Agency and Mansfield District Council) rather than imposing a low level fine that would only reflect the defendant's means but not the gravity of the offence.

The charges were brought by the Environment Agency under the Environmental Protection Act 1990.

 

Maritime and Coastguard Agency Prosecutions

A Master without a ticket

Defendant: Svitzer UK Ltd at Ipswich Magistrates' Court

Offence: Breach of Regulation 4 of The Merchant Shipping (Safe Manning, Hours of Work and Watchkeeping) Regulations 1997 and s85 and s86 Merchant Shipping Act 1995

Details: Svitzer pled guilty to employing a Master without a valid Certificate of Competence. The Master forgot to renew his certificate, which he is required to do every five years, and continued to sail as master without a certificate from 2005 to 2009. The company failed to notice that their employee no longer had a current certificate.

Penalty: Svitzer UK Ltd was fined £3,000 plus £4,000 in costs

 

Breach of Traffic Separation Scheme

Defendant: SET (Angel) Limited (formerly known as Seafield Emiel Trawlers (Lady T) Limited at Folkestone Magistrates' Court

Offence: Breach of Rule 10 (b) (i) of the Collision Regulations

Details: On 17 September 2008 the UK registered fishing vessel Emilia M Eniel (BM10) trav­elled the wrong way through the Dover Straits Traffic Separation Scheme for a period of just over two hours. The Emilia M Emiel was identified by the Coastguard aircraft. Throughout the incident the vessel was not engaged in fishing.

Subsequent enquiries proved to be difficult and time consuming, because of the need to correctly identify who had been on board the vessel at the time of the incident and to es­tablish their roles whilst on board. The investigation involved a large number of interviews including those with a director of the company which owned the vessel. What emerged from the interviews was a large degree of confusion between individuals on board as to who was the effective skipper of the vessel at the relevant time. This was a manifest failure on the part of the company to ensure that these matters were clear to all concerned before the vessel was put to sea. 

Penalty: SET (Angel) Limited was fined £2,000 plus £3,000 costs

 

Failure to take breath test

Defendant: Captain Rajesh K Singh at Lyndhurst Magistrates' Court

Date of Offence: 8 September 2010

Offence: Failing to supply a specimen.

Details: In the early hours of Wednesday 8 September 2010 Nord Fast, a 176m long tanker with a displacement of 48,983 tonnes was proceeding in to Fawley oil refinery jetty with the assistance of a pilot.

The Pilot became concerned about the state of the Captain and subsequently the Police attended the vessel and Captain Singh was breathalysed. He failed that test and so was arrested and take to the Police Station for further tests. At the Police Station he recorded a reading of 78 but then failed to undertake a second test which is required by procedures.

Penalty: Captain Singh was fined £1,600 plus £85 costs and £15 victim support charge

 

Health and Safety news

Local authorities have been reminded of their health and safety responsibilities ahead of waste and recycling inspection programme.

Local authorities are being reminded to check that they are clear on their health and safety responsibilities in procuring and managing waste and recycling services, ahead of a pro­gramme of inspections that will begin next month.

Over the next three years, inspectors from the HSE will look at the procurement and man­agement of municipal waste and recycling services following the introduction of guidance in January that clarifies the legal duties on local authorities, whether they deliver them in-house or contract them out. Some mistakenly believe that contracting out these services relieves them of health and safety responsibilities.

HSE Inspector, Wayne Williams spoke at the Birmingham NEC in the following terms:

"Despite recent improvements, the performance of the waste and recycling sector is still poor compared with others. The industry has nine times more fatal accidents than the na­tional average and four times as many workers suffer injuries.

As well as dealing with those authorities that have systems and processes that need im­provement, we want to use our inspections to identify areas of good practice which can be shared with others. We've worked with local authorities and members of the Waste Industry Health and Safety (WISH) forum, amongst others, to develop the guidance. We have also run a series of regional events, giving local authorities the opportunity to ask questions, share their experiences with others and seek advice on potential management solutions. Nothing should come as a surprise.

We are encouraging local authorities to come and see us at this event and get any help or advice they need. As clients local authorities have real influence on how services are deliv­ered and they need to be using this influence to ensure it is done safely."

 

New safety advice issued on electric gates

Installers, designers, maintenance firms and manufacturers of electric gates, are being urged to seriously consider new safety advice issued by the HSE following the recent deaths of two children involving these gates.

The safety alert points out that limiting the closing forces of gates alone will not provide sufficient protection to meet the relevant standards, and installers must fit additional safe­guards to gates in public areas.

HSE's Director of Field Operations, David Ashton, said:

"Electric or automatic gates are designed to stop if someone gets in the way, and installers and those maintaining these gates have a real duty to ensure this happens. They must take their responsibilities seriously to make sure that anti-crushing, shearing and trapping safety protection devices are correctly set and maintained."

This alert follows a similar notice issued in February this year reminding gate manufacturers and installers of their safety responsibilities when designing, building and installing electri­cally powered gates.

On 28 June this year, Semelia Campbell, 6, died when she was crushed by electric gates in Manchester. A few days later on 3 July, Karolina Golabek, 5, was also crushed to death by electric gates in Bridgend, South Wales.

While the police and HSE investigations continue into both deaths, HSE does want to make it clear to installers that they must take action to prevent pedestrians from becoming trapped in electric gates.

David Ashton added:

"When manufacturing, designing or installing electric gates, it's crucial to consider who will be in the area when it's operating. If general public can access the gate then additional pro­tections should be in place.  These protections can be in the form of creating safe distances, installing fixed guards, lim­iting the forces or installing sensitive protective equipment - among others." 

 

1008BRN.pdf (881.30 kb)

Editorial

August, traditionally is the month of summer holidays - or 'the long vac'. It used to be the case that few courts sat in August and any non-essential court business would be adjourned from mid-late July to September. Well those relaxed days are clearly on the wane. Whilst there have been fewer cases to report on in August than you'd expect in a typical non-holi­day month there have still been more than enough. The proportion of Scottish cases being reported is higher this month than average - perhaps because their holiday season tends to start earlier in July and finish by mid-August. Another proprtionate increase this month is in the number of s3(1) HSWA prosecutions - the breaching of the health and safety duty owed by an employer to persons who may be affected by his work - in other words the duty owed to 'the public'...

 

Death of vineyard owner

George Musgrave, the owner of a Cornish vineyard, died after a delivery of empty wine bottles crashed onto him when they fell from the tail lift of a lorry he was helping to unload. The load fell from the tail lift causing fatal head and chest injuries.

Following that tragic incident Gregory Distribution Ltd of North Park, North Tawton was prosecuted by the HSE for breaching its duty under s3(1) HSWA. After pleading guilty the company was fined £200,000 and ordered to pay costs of £16,993 costs by Truro Crown Court.

The company accepted that it had exposed Mr Musgrave to risk by failing to ensure ad­equate arrangements and procedures for the unloading of pallets.

HSE Inspector, Simon Jones, said: "This tragic accident highlights the dangers involved in unloading large and heavy loads using a tail lift. Employers should ensure that employees are given the right equipment, information, instruction and training to allow them to unload loads safely.  Where employers use the services of agency staff they should ensure that those agency staff are aware of the systems of work in place and have the skills and training to undertake the required tasks.  Tail lifts should be examined by a competent person at least every six months to ensure that they are safe to use.  If these simple measures had been taken then this accident would not have happened and Mr Musgrave would not have died in these tragic circumstances."

 

Ed - The Lifting Operations and Lifting Equipment Regulations 1998 states that tail lifts should be thoroughly examined every six months under Section 33(1)(c) of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974.

 

Worker left with long-term injuries after 21m fall

Two UK construction companies have been fined a total of £125,000 after a worker was seri­ously injured when he fell 21 metres from a hospital building under construction in Newcas­tle-upon-Tyne.

Laing O'Rourke Construction Limited and Expanded Structures Limited were prosecuted by the HSE following the incident at the Royal Victoria Infirmary (RVI) on 20 October 2006.

The hole Mr McColgan fell through

Steven McColgan, 37, from Edinburgh, was working on the construction of the hospital at the time. Newcastle Crown Court heard that part of an unsupported working platform broke away when he stood on it, causing him to fall 21m to the ground.

Mr McColgan suffered serious multiple injuries to his head and body in the fall and his inju­ries continue to be life-changing.

The HSE investigation revealed that sections of the falsework, acting as a temporary struc­ture supporting the working platform, were removed before work on the concrete slab was complete.

Both companies, which are based at Bridge Place, Anchor Boulevard, Admiral's Place, Cross­ways in Kent, pleaded guilty to breaching Section 3(1) HSWA. Laing O'Rourke Construction Ltd was fined £50,000 and ordered to pay costs of £13,756 and Expanded Structures Ltd was fined £75,000 and ordered to pay costs of £14,154.

After the case, HSE Inspector Victoria Wise said:

"Laing O'Rourke Construction Ltd and Expanded Structures Ltd failed in their duty of care to Mr McColgan, who was lucky to survive the fall.  The Royal Victoria Infirmary construction site  Falls from height are the single biggest cause of work-related deaths in Great Britain. It is imperative that such a high risk activity is subject to a high degree of overall management and control.  In the last three years there were 142 work-related fatalities resulting from a fall from height. It is tragic that Mr McColgan's injuries could so easily have been avoided if those in a position of responsibility had effectively discharged their duties".

"Laing O'Rourke Construction Ltd had a duty as principal contractor to ensure that safe systems of work were in place and were being implemented on their site. The company had received previous advice from HSE on this specific matter, at another Newcastle site only two years earlier.  Specialist contractor Expanded Structures Ltd had a duty to ensure that the risks associated with their work had been adequately assessed and that day to day controls and systems of work were effective".

 

Quarry company fined after digger death

Leiths Scotland Limited, an Aberdeen-based quarrying company has been fined £96,000 after a man was crushed to death while working beneath a mechanical digger.

Arthur Jamieson, 58, from Keith, Banffshire, was working beneath the digger on 21 No­vember 2008 at Parkmore Quarry, Dufftown, Aberlour, when the vehicle rolled backwards, crushing him.

Leiths Scotland Limited, Mr Jamieson's employer and a company specialising in quarrying operations, general construction activities and civil engineering, was prosecuted.

Elgin Sheriff Court heard mobile plant fitter, Mr Jamieson, was fixing a transmission leak on the five-and-a-half tonne digger.

The vehicle was raised on a ramp, but its rear wheels were inadequately secured. Mr Ja­mieson was crushed when the vehicle rolled off the ramp, and was suffocated as a result of a wheel compressing his chest.

HSE's investigation concluded that Leiths Scotland Limited failed to provide adequate in­formation, instruction, training and supervision to Mr Jamieson to prevent any risk to his health while working for them.

Mr Jamieson had not previously carried out the task and was expected to establish his own method of raising and supporting the vehicle above the ground. He was left to organise suit­able blocks to support the digger without direct supervision or suitable instructions.

The company, based in Rigifa, Cove, Aberdeen, pleaded guilty to breaching section 2(1) HSWA at Elgin Sheriff Court on Monday 9 August 2010, where it was ordered to pay £96,000.

After sentencing, HSE Inspector Norman Buchanan said:

"This tragic incident should have been avoided. Although Arthur Jamieson was undoubtedly an experienced mobile plant fitter, he had not previously carried out this particular task for this firm. He should have received adequate information, training and supervision from his employers, which Leiths did not provide.  It is wholly unacceptable his employers left him unsupervised to devise his own means of working on such a risky repair job.

"Had Mr Jamieson been adequately supervised, he would not have been able to start work­ing underneath the digger when it was inadequately secured at the rear and therefore able to move from its position on the ramps. As a result his death could have been prevented."

 

Worker paralysed after being crushed by steel beam

Strata Homes Yorkshire Limited, a Doncaster housing developer, has been fined £30,000 af­ter a worker was left paralysed from the chest down when he was crushed by a steel beam weighing more than 660 pounds.

Anton Burrows, 24, from Dewsbury was working as part of a bricklaying team sub-contract­ed to Strata Homes Yorkshire Ltd, at their Suede Development construction site in Oxley Road, Huddersfield, on 7 April 2009 when the incident occurred.

Mr Burrows was helping a driver of a telescopic forklift truck to lift the steel beam onto two brick pillars. Although the beam initially landed as intended, as the forklift was withdrawing, the forks caught the beam, dislodging it from the pillars. Mr Burrows walked into the area as this happened, and the beam crashed down on top of him.

He suffered extensive injuries, including spinal damage, which resulted in him being left quadriplegic.

The HSE prosecuted Strata Homes Yorkshire Ltd, of Quay Point, Lakeside, Doncaster for its role in the incident. The company pleaded guilty to breaching Regulation 8 of the Lifting Operations and Lifting Equipment Regulations 1998 and was fined £30,000 and ordered to pay £16,062 in costs.

After the hearing HSE Inspector Alasdair Green said:

"The terrible injuries sustained in this incident have changed the way of life for Mr Burrows and his family for ever.  Had the lifting operation been properly planned and supervised, in line with the regula­tions, the Approved Code of Practice and HSE's guidance, this devastating incident which could have very easily killed someone, would have been avoided."

"Today's prosecution must serve to remind all employers of their duties and responsibilities in protecting workers during lifting operations so that others do not suffer in this way."

Ed - Regulation 8 of the Lifting Operations and Lifting Equipment Regulations 1998 states that "Every employer shall ensure that every lifting operation involving lifting equipment is properly planned by a competent person; appropriately supervised; and carried out in a safe manner."

 

Balfour Beatty and Multibuild fined after piling machine crashes onto road

Balfour Beatty Ground Engineering Ltd and Multibuild Ltd have pleaded guilty to breaching s3(1) HSWA following an incident in which a 44 tonne machine crashed onto a busy main road in Hull.

The court heard that a piling machine, used to drive building supports into the ground, fell over and rolled across the road before crushing a wall opposite during the evening rush hour on 10 December 2007. Tower Street was closed for several hours until it was made safe.

The HSE investigation found that the main contractor, Multibuild Ltd, was responsible for providing a stone platform for the machine to work from, but had failed to design or install it correctly.

Balfour Beatty Ground Engineering Ltd as a specialist sub-contractor had the responsibility for safely carrying out the work.

After the hearing HSE Inspector Dave Redman commented:

"This incident could easily have resulted in disaster, and it is nothing short of a miracle that no one was killed or seriously injured given it occurred during the peak of the evening rush hour.

"It is every company's responsibility to ensure that employees and members of the public are not exposed to danger from heavy construction machinery.

"There is extensive guidance governing safe working in this sector, and we hope today's prosecution serves to remind people of their duties so that we don't witness an incident of this kind again."

Balfour Beatty was fined £25,000 and ordered to pay £17,676 in costs. Multibuild Ltd was fined £20,000 and ordered to pay £18,687 costs.

 

Council fined following drowning

Argyll and Bute Council has been fined £20,000 after a man died when he drove over an unprotected edge of a car park at Coal Pier in Dunoon.

Duncan MacGillivray, 75 of Dunoon, drowned on 17 September 2007, when it is believed that he accidentally put his car into forward gear rather than reverse to exit a parking bay. The vehicle mounted the edging, and, as there was no protective barrier, the car fell approx­imately 3m into the sea below and Mr MacGillivray was trapped.

The HSE found that whilst there were some barriers in place at the pier, there were none in the area where Mr MacGillivray had parked.

At an earlier date Dunoon Sheriff Court heard that neither prior to the pier being utilised as a council-operated car park nor at any time after it was brought into such use, was there assessment of risk to those using the car park. Nor had any action been taken to provide adequate edge protection to prevent incidents like this.

Argyll and Bute Council pleaded guilty to breaching Section 3(1) HSWA 1974.

Following the case, Inspector Mike Orr said:

"Mr MacGillivray died in tragic and traumatic circumstances, ultimately drowning in the sea below the pier. A simple risk assessment would have identified the clear risks of an unpro­tected sheer drop into the sea at the edge of a car park - but sadly the council failed to do this.

"Argyll and Bute Council was responsible for the maintenance and operation of this charg­ing public car park. When it changed the use of the pier, from a commercial site, it should have quickly identified any risks to members of the public. It's simply not acceptable that this didn't happen."

 

London Tower Crane Hire & Sales fined after 4 tonne weight crashed to the ground

London Tower Crane Hire & Sales Limited has been prosecuted and fined after the hook broke off a tower crane and its four tonne load crashed 36 m to the ground, narrowly miss­ing a footpath. The company admitted breaching Section 3(1) HSWA and Regulation 5(2) of the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007.

On 3 November 2007, the load - which was part of a building under construction at Hert­fordshire Regional College in Turnford, near Cheshunt - came down heavily beside part of the campus regularly used by students. The impact also demolished the site boundary fence and damaged a college building.  The company, which has a head office at Elstree Way, Borehamwood, Hertfordshire, was fined £18,000 and ordered to pay £15,837.45 in costs.

HSE Inspector Norman Macritchie said:

"It was a matter of good fortune that no-one was injured in this entirely avoidable incident.

"Those undertaking lifting operations have absolute duties to plan, supervise and carry them out safely. Maintenance staff had indentified safety-critical faults in the crane yet simple controls needed to prevent use of defective equipment were not implemented. Poor commu­nication and teamwork, together with inadequate supervision, all contributed to this inci­dent.

"This case has important lessons for all those operating lifting equipment and especially tower cranes."

Ed - Reg 5(2) of the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007 states: "Ev­ery person concerned in a project who is working under the control of another person shall report to that person anything which he is aware is likely to endanger the health or safety of himself or others."

 

Worker impaled at Workington factory

A Workington company has been fined £15,000 after a steel cable shot through a worker's leg, leaving him with a hole through his shin.

A.C.P (Concrete) Ltd, which produces concrete panels, was prosecuted by the HSE following the incident at their factory in the Derwent Howe Industrial Estate, which left worker Jamie Graham, 25, from Cockermouth in a hip to toe full leg cast for six weeks and on crutches for another four months.

The steel cables and concrete mould that injured Mr Graham

Workington Magistrates' court heard that steel cables were threaded through concrete moulds and stretched to 2000 lbs tension. On 19 March 2009, a grip holding one of the ten­sioned cables failed, releasing a 200-feet long cable.  When Mr Graham went to re-thread that cable, another grip failed, releasing a second 200-feet-long steel cable, the end of which passed straight through his lower right leg, leav­ing him impaled on the 9mm steel cable.

The fire and rescue service had to cut the cable to release him and he was taken to hospital with the end of the cable still imbedded though his shin.

An HSE investigation found the company did not have any system in place for inspecting and maintaining the grips, and that an average of eight grips failed each week at the premises.

HSE also concluded that A.C.P did not have a safe system of work in place for re-threading the steel cables and fixing new grips when they failed on tensioned cables. This meant that workers could be crouching directly in line with the ends of tensioned cables whilst making repairs.

HSE Inspector Mike Griffiths, said: "This terrifying incident should have been prevented. The lack of any inspection or maintenance of the grips meant that problems with them were only detected when a grip failed and that could sometimes result in a cable being released at high speed.

"The fact that the grips had to fail before they were replaced meant that there were signifi­cantly more failures under tension and the chances of a serious injury were increased.

"The company should have ensured that the task of re-threading the cables was properly as­sessed and that the significant risks to their employees were properly controlled."

The court heard that Mr Graham, who is a keen weight trainer, was significantly immobilised for six weeks after the incident and still suffers pain and weakness in his right leg.

The company pleaded guilty to breaching section 2(1) HSWA and was also ordered to pay £6,638 costs.

 

Wembley builder exposed customers to CO

A building company and one of its directors from Wembley have been fined a total of £15,000 after leaving two customers at risk of death or serious illness from exposure to car­bon monoxide fumes.

Between 3 September and 8 December 2009, Rushi Construction (UK) Limited, owned by Vi­kas Patel, was building an extension to a home in Westwood Drive, Little Chalfont, in Buck­inghamshire.

Part of the extension was built around the flue outlet of a gas boiler, but the HSE investiga­tion revealed that no Gas Safe registered engineer had been involved in the gas fitting work. Mr Patel had tried to use a sewage pipe and a washing machine vent hose, to extend the flue outlet across the new room and out a window - without success. This meant that harm­ful carbon monoxide gases were being released in the house, exposing the homeowners to potentially deadly fumes.  Mr Patel was asked to leave the job by the customers in December 2009 and after com­plaints to National Grid, the supply of gas to the property was disconnected in January 2010.

Following sentencing, HSE Inspector Stephen Manley said:

"Everybody involved in construction work, from small jobs such as fitting a conservatory, to larger extension builds, must think about the effect it may have on the safe operation of existing services such as gas appliances and flues.  If you're in any doubt as to the effect of your work on existing gas systems then you are probably in the wrong business - but at the very least you should take advice from an engi­neer registered with the Gas Safe Register.

"Mr Patel's clients could have died because of the unsafe situation he created in their home. HSE will always take action when we see examples of such blatant disregard or ignorance, of regulations, guidance, and common sense."

Rushi Construction (UK) Ltd based at Braemar Avenue, Wembley, Brent, pleaded guilty to breaching section 3(1) HSWA and regulations 4 and 8(1) of the Gas Safety (Installation and Use) Regulations 1998. The company was fined £12,000 and ordered to pay costs of £1,000.

Vikas Patel, of Braemar Avenue, Wembley, Brent also pleaded to the smae offences and was fined £3,000 and ordered to pay costs of £731.

Ed - Regulation 8(1) of the Gas Safety (Installation and Use) Regulations 1998 states: "No person shall make any alteration to premises in which a gas fitting or a gas storage vessel is fitted if that alteration would adversely affect the safety of the fitting or vessel in such a manner that, if the fitting or vessel had been installed after the alteration, there would have been a contravention of, or failure to comply with, these regulations."

Regulation 4 of the Gas Safety (Installation and Use) Regulations 1998 states: "Where an employer or self-employed person requires any work in relation to a gas fitting to be carried out at any place of work under his control or where an employer or self-employed person has control to any extent of work in relation to a gas fitting, he shall take reasonable steps to ensure that the person undertaking that work is, or is employed by, a member of a class of persons approved by the Health and Safety Executive."

 

Schoolboy killed after falling through farm roof

A Moray farming partnership has been fined £13,500 at Elgin Sheriff Court following an incident where a 13-year-old boy, Austin Irvine, fell through the roof of a farm building and sustained serious injuries from which he later died.

The incident happened on 21 August 2006.

He was raised up to roof level in the bucket of a tractor by his stepfather and the boy walked onto the roof. As he walked across the roof he stepped onto a skylight which collapsed. He fell through the skylight, around 4m to the ground and suffered serious injuries from which he later died.

An HSE investigation into the incident revealed that there was no proper edge protection on the roof and no measures in place to prevent falls through the corrugated asbestos cement sheeting which made up the roof.

John Irvine and Son, of Inverlochy Farm, Tomintoul, Ballindalloch, pleaded guilty to breach­ing Section 3(1) HSWA.

Following the case, HSE Inspector Ann Poyner said:

"This tragedy should never have happened and could have been prevented if John Irvine and Son had properly assessed the risks of working on a fragile roof and taken steps to prevent falls through the roof.

"Farmers and those working in agriculture frequently carry out roof work, yet fail to appre­ciate the risks involved are always substantial. If possible, avoid going on fragile roofs and always keep children clear of high risk activities. If you are planning this type of work should always make sure you have the right equipment to ensure that the work area is strong enough to work from and that guard rails are in place at open edges and suitable access is provided."

 

Company and director prosecuted after staff exposed to high levels of lead

A sheet metal manufacturing company and its director have been fined after workers were exposed to high levels of lead at its factory in Norfolk.

Staff at the Anglia Lead Ltd plant in Barker Street, Norwich, suffered the exposure as they cast molten lead into lead sheeting, sold for various uses including roofing old buildings, such as churches.

Anglia Lead Ltd had numerous health and safety failings, the prosecution brought by the HSE found. Workers could have breathed in lead dust; absorbed the substance into their skin; or ingested it orally, for example when they ate, drank or smoked a cigarette during breaks or even after work hours without washing their hands.

The company appeared at Norwich Magistrates' Court and admitted failing to ensure the health and safety of its workers, breaching s2(1) HSWA. Director Carlton Edwards admitted committing the same offence in his capacity as a company director.

Magistrates fined the company £10,000 and Mr Edwards a further £10,000. The company was also ordered to pay full prosecution costs of £10,556.

Investigations by the Health and Safety Executive found the company and its director had:

Failed to provide suitable and sufficient assessment of the risks to health created by work involving lead

Failed to adequately control exposure to lead

Failed to provide sufficient control measures, including lack of adequate personal protective equipment (PPE), no adequate local exhaust ventilation system to remove lead fumes from the workplace, no adequate clothes washing system and no adequate hygiene controls

Failed to provide employees with suitable information, instruction and training

Failed to suitably investigate when occupational exposure level limits were exceeded and action levels reached

Failed to provide air monitoring as regularly as required

HSE Inspector Julie Jarvey said:

"Exposure to lead is very serious and can be damaging to health. Lead is classified as a sub­stance hazardous to health for good reason - when the dust or fumes are ingested or inhaled it can lead to long term ill-effects.  Anglia Lead Ltd and its director failed to discharge their duties, meaning the company's pro­cesses fell significantly below the expected standards required for working with the material.  HSE will not hesitate to prosecute companies and directors failing to carry out their legal obligations for ensuring the health and safety of their employees."

 

Steeplejack firm fined

A Stoke-on-Trent steeplejack firm has been fined £8,000 after one of its workers fell from scaffolding causing him injuries that left him in plaster for four months.

Rafferty Chimneys Engineering Ltd of Nash Peake Street, was working at a site in Tunstall when Kevin Ford fell 1.5m to the ground causing a serious injury to his heel.

The company pleaded guilty to breaching s2(1) HSWA. It was also ordered to pay £5,000 costs.

Newcastle-under-Lyme magistrates heard how on 4 March 2009 the company had been contracted to inspect four 20m tall steel chimneys at Churchill China (UK) Ltd pottery firm. A tower scaffold was used to access the eves of the roof.

The HSE investigation revealed that the tower's guard rail was too low, it did not use the right boards and no toe boards were in place.

Two workers walked across a fragile asbestos sheet roof using boards just 45cm wide with no safety measures in place. They carried equipment back and forth throughout the day despite the potential for falling nearly 4m into the workshop below.

Mr Ford fell when he was dismantling the tower scaffold at the end of the job. He had low­ered a board down from the upper level when he slipped and fell suffering a serious frac­ture to the heel of his left foot. He needed pins inserted into the bone and spent 16 weeks in plaster.

HSE inspector Guy Dale said:

"Working at height is the most common cause of workplace injuries and this incident shows the very real dangers, no matter what the distance to the ground.

"With the right equipment and a proper risk assessment this could have been prevented. As it was, there were so many instances and potential for falls throughout the day leading up to this event that it was lucky both men weren't involved in serious injuries."

Ed - Falling from height remains one of the most common causes of workplace injuries in the UK. Last year there were 1,396 major injuries to workers, as well as 3,044 workers hav­ing to take in excess of three days off work.

 

Worker suffers life-changing injuries after roof fall

A construction worker from Carmarthen suffered serious injuries when he fell 3m from the roof of a farm building.

Gwyndaf Davies, who was 21 at the time of the incident, was helping to re-roof a building at Penwerddu Farm, Boncath on 29 April 2009. He fell through the roof to the concrete floor below suffering multiple facial fractures, a traumatic brain injury and multiple spine frac­tures.

Mr Davies spent nine months as an in-patient at Morriston hospital and has undergone sig­nificant facial reconstructive surgery and eye surgery.

The accident has left Gwyndaf with the lasting effects of a traumatic brain injury, blind in one eye and partially sighted in the other. He has limited speech and cannot walk without aid. Gwyndaf continues to receive intensive physiotherapy and speech therapy, and it is likely he will require significant care for the rest of his life.

The HSE prosecuted Mr Davies' employer, Delme L James Ltd, for failing to take steps to prevent workers falling from height. Mr Davies had worked for the company since leaving school.

The HSE's investigation revealed that the company did not plan, supervise or carry out the work safely. There was only limited edge protection to prevent workers falling from the roof and no measures to prevent them falling into the building.

Delme L James Ltd of Pencaer Bryn Ewan, Cynwyl Elfed, Carmarthenshire, pleaded guilty to a breach of Regulation 4 of the Work at Height Regulations 2005 when they appeared before Haverfordwest magistrates. They were fined £8,000 and ordered to pay costs of £2,189.40.

HSE inspector, Anne Marie Orrells, said:

"Mr Davies is a young man who has suffered dreadful injuries as a result of this accident which could have resulted in his death. This situation could so easily have been prevented and Mr Davies and his family are still trying to come to terms with the lasting effects of what has happened.

"Falls from height are one of the major causes of death and serious injury in the construction industry. The regulations are clear and well established but HSE continues to see tragic cases such as this resulting from employers not fulfilling their duty to protect workers.

"There is a great deal of guidance freely available on the HSE website, so there is no excuse for getting it wrong - especially given the severity of the consequences."

Provisional figures for 2008/09 show that 24 people in Carmarthenshire alone received injuries that were classed as major or requiring more than three days off work as a result of a fall from height. Figure released by HSE in June this year show that seven workers were killed at work in Wales between 1 April 2009 and 31 March 2010.

Ed Regulation 4 of the Work at Height Regulations 2005 states: "Every employer shall ensure that work at height is (a) properly planned; (b) appropriately supervised; and (c) carried out in a manner which is so far as is reasonably practicable safe.

 

Worker loses fingers in between metal rollers

A Tyneside firm has been fined £8,000 after a worker's hand was badly injured when it was drawn between two rotating metal rollers.

North Tyneside Magistrates' Court heard how Gary Burke, 45, of North Shields, lost his little finger and part of the other fingers on his right hand following the incident at Formica Ltd on Coast Road, North Shields.

On 20 November 2009 Mr Burke was working on a machine which coats paper with resin and then cuts it into lengths to produce the back of a laminated product.

The HSE investigation revealed that there had been consistent production problems with the machine. Mr Burke was using his right hand to check for any resin deposits on the feed belts, when his glove became caught on a belt and his hand was drawn between the two guide rollers.

Despite several operations, doctors were unable to save Mr Burke's little finger though he hopes that they will be able to re-construct two of his fingers to restore some function long term. The incident has had a substantial impact on his life as he does not have full use of his hand. While he has returned to work, he has not been able to do his old job and is now on light duties.

Formica Ltd, of Silver Fox Way, Cobalt Business Park, Newcastle, pleaded guilty to breaching section 2(1) HSWA. As well as the fine, the company was also ordered to pay £4741.60 in costs.

After the case, HSE Inspector Andrea Robbins, said:  "Production problems such as misalignment of belts and nicks in the paper were a regular problem with this machine and had been occurring for a number of years - yet Formica Ltd had done little about it. It had become custom and practice for workers to try and rectify faults themselves.

The incident could have easily been prevented if the company had implemented safe systems of work for fault finding and ensured that guards were in place to prevent access to danger­ous moving parts of the machine."

 

Maintenance job leaves man with a broken back

A Staffordshire company Klarius UK Ltd has been fined £8,000 after one of its workers fell more than 2m from a scaffold tower, fracturing one vertebra, crushing another and leaving him immobilised for more than six weeks.

Barry Derbyshire, 61, from Cheadle, Staffordshire, was carrying out routine maintenance on a machine used to make exhaust pipes when he fell on 18 August 2009. It was a regular job that was carried out by a number of people on three similar machines.

Newcastle-under-Lyme Magistrates Court heard that Mr Derbyshire, who was working for Klarius UK Ltd, had been stooping down to try and locate an oil leak when he stood up and possibly overbalanced, falling off the edge.

An investigation by the HSE revealed there had never been a guardrail on one edge of the scaffold as it was felt it would interfere with access to the machines.

Klarius UK Ltd, based at Brookhouses Industrial Estate, Cheadle, Staffordshire, pleaded guilty to breaching Regulation 6(3) of the Work at Height Regulations 2005. As well as being fined, it was also ordered to pay £1,892 costs.

Onion firm fined after serious ladder injury

A Spalding onion packing firm, Moulton Bulb Company Ltd, has been fined after a worker broke his shoulder falling from a ladder.

Company employee Richard Webster was covering onion boxes with plastic sheeting when he fell around 3m at the firm's Glebe Farm site at Roman Bank, Spalding, on 10 September 2009.

The HSE found Mr Webster of Whaplode, near Spalding, fell from a ladder as he was wrap­ping a five and a half metre stack of boxes in polythene.

Mr Webster broke his shoulder which kept him off work for a month.

Moulton Bulb Company Ltd of Long Lane, Moulton, near Spalding, pleaded guilty to breach­ing Regulation 4(1) of the Work at Height Regulations 2005 and was fined £6,000 and or­dered to pay costs of £2,188.  Prosecuting, HSE Inspector Jo Anderson said:

"Falls from height are the biggest cause of workplace deaths and it's crucial employers make sure work is properly planned, appropriately supervised and sufficient measures are put in place to protect staff from these risks.

"As a result of this the company has changed its procedures to eliminate the need to work at height by applying polythene sheeting at floor level and then lifting the boxes up.  I'm satisfied the company has learned from this incident and would encourage employers in a similar line of business to consider doing the same, if they don't already."

 

Man is left brain damaged by falling panel saw

Joda Freight Limited, a haulage company, has been fined £5,000 after one of its employees suffered brain damage when he was struck on the head by a 290 kg panel saw.

Nicholas Holmes, 49, from Bradford, was delivering panel saws to the Saw Centre in Eglinton Street, Glasgow, on 16 August 2007 when one fell off the vehicle, hitting him on the head. Mr Holmes was left with permanent brain damage by the incident.

The HSE investigation found that Mr Holmes' employers, Joda Freight Limited, did not have a reliable system of communication in place to make sure their drivers were informed about the securing and stability of loads.

Mr Holmes had not been told anything about how the panel saws were secured in the lorry. When he removed the straps securing the saws, the load became unstable, causing the inci­dent.

Joda Freight Limited pleaded guilty to breaching Section 2(1) HSWA.

Following the case, HSE Inspector Jean Edgar said:

"This was a horrific incident and will have terrible consequences for Mr Holmes and his fam­ily for many years to come.  Haulage companies must make sure information is properly communicated between driv­ers in how a load is secured and strapped. Verbal messages through a third party may not be enough.  This is particularly important where the delivery driver did not load the vehicle - and has little information on the precise strapping method used to secure it." 

 

Other health and safety offences in brief

 

Defendants	Offences	Penalty	Details
Eastern Regional Shopfitters Ltd	HSWA s3(1) Control of Asbestos Regulations 2006 regs 5, 8, 11	Total £4,000 + £3,215 costs	Shopfitters disturbed asbestos during refurbishment - Em­ployer knew about it but failed to act upon knowledge or plan works
Acetech Construc­tion Limited	Control of Asbestos Regulations 2006 regs 5, 8(2) and 11(1)(A)(1)(a)	£3,400+ £5,000 costs	Scrapping 'The Patricia III' failure to carry out adequate asbestos survey and then strip­ping vessel
Stealsafe Limited Dennis Brunt Peter Critchard	PUWER 1998 reg 11(1)	Total fines £2,001+ £250 costs	Fingers crushed in hydraulic press
Greswolde Con­struction Limited	Control of Asbestos Regulations 2006 regs 10(1) and 11(1)(a)	£1,000+ £2,268 costs	Failure to warn employees of the presence of asbestos and give appropriate information, training etc

 

Dumping waste costs Derbyshire firm nearly £95,000

On 29 July, ADIS Scaffolding Ltd of M1 Commerce Park, Long Duckmanton, Derbyshire was found guilty at Nottingham Crown Court of two charges related to the illegal deposit, treat­ing and keeping of commercial waste on land without a waste management licence.

The case was proved in the company's absence. The jury duly found the company guilty of both charges under s33 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990, in respect of deposits of building waste at unlicensed sites at Greenacres (Worksop) and Cresswell.

The judge sentenced the company to a fine of £20,000 on each count. He also ordered the company to pay compensation of £8,500 in respect of the deposit at Greenacres and £25,200 in respect of the deposit at Cresswell. He ordered the company to pay prosecution costs of £21,244.13.

Speaking for the Environment Agency, Kevin Saunders told the court that ADIS Scaffolding Ltd operated from premises on the MI Commerce Park.

ADIS had registered with the Environment Agency a formal exemption to allow the company to manufacture animal bedding from pallets and wood from their waste transfer station.

The Environment Agency had also issued the company with a permit for the storage and treatment of construction and demolition waste.

At the same site, the director of ADIS Scaffolding Ltd, Malcolm Knights, operated a skip hire company, CP Skips, which had registered a formal exemption to crush and grade rubble from construction and demolition waste. There is a screen on site processing this waste.

In 2006, Mr Knights bought some land between the M1 and his company's site. An ADIS employee offered excess soil from this land to a friend, who, having verified that it was suit­able, agreed to take it to restore a field at Green Lane, Hodthorpe.

The soil was delivered by various ADIS employees. In May 2007, the friend stopped the deliveries and complained to ADIS about the poor quality of the material. An inspection revealed that later deliveries were contaminated with wood, rubble and plastic, resembling the screened waste generated by CP Skips rather than the soil originally offered.

Soon after, during summer 2007, Mr Knights instructed an employee to tip screened build­ing waste, and waste that included soiled wood chippings, at the former Creswell colliery tip where Mr Knights held a tenancy agreement with UK Coal Mining Ltd. The tenancy agree­ment did not allow the deposit of such waste.

Local residents witnessed deliveries to and from the Creswell site and, in October 2007, Derbyshire County Council received a complaint. The Council informed the Environment Agency and later wrote to ADIS advising them to stop tipping at the colliery and remove the waste. They also informed UK Coal Mining Ltd, which instructed ADIS to stop the deliveries and remove the waste. Waste removal began but was stopped due to weather conditions.

Mr Knights also agreed to segregate and remove waste from the Hodthorpe site but the process was stopped when the site owner discovered that the driver was burying waste rather than segregating and removing it.

In January 2008, a routine Environment Agency inspection of ADIS Scaffolding Ltd at M1 Commerce Park found materials similar to those found on the Creswell and Hodthorpe sites.

The following month, acting on information received, Council officers again visited Creswell. They were joined by Environment Agency officers who saw a tracked bulldozer leaving the site. Waste that had previously been dumped in piles had been spread out across the field. Mr Knights later explained that he was waiting for the waste to dry before removing it and that this was the reason for spreading it.

During May and June 2008 Environment Agency officers inspected both the Creswell and Hodthorpe sites. They found that ADIS had still not removed the waste.

We estimate that depositing waste illegally at Hodthorpe and Creswell saved the company approximately £26,000 in tipping and landfill tax.

Speaking after the case Dave Brown, an Environment Agency officer involved in the investi­gation said: "ADIS Scaffolding Ltd used the land at Creswell and Hodthorpe illegally for the deposit of waste, saving them about £26,000 and drawing other people unknowingly into illegal waste activity. The law exists to protect people and the environment from the con­sequences of such actions. As this court case demonstrates, we are not prepared to toler­ate this sort of activity and we hope today's result will deter others from such irresponsible behaviour."

The Judge in sentencing said that he accepted prosecuting counsel's submissions in relation to the need for a deterrent sentence in this instance, and that the sentencing guidelines for regulatory offences require deterrent sentences to be passed.  The Judge said that the Defendant's company had elected trial by jury and then failed to at­tend, and that this case concerned the systematic dumping of waste on two green field sites for profit.

 

Dust and litter from recycling site scattered in Gainsborough

Plastics recycling firm AWS Eco Plastics Ltd has been fined £23,000 and ordered to pay £5,600 costs for allowing dust and litter to scatter outside its site in Gainsborough. The of­fences charged related to failures to comply with the permit conditions which regulated the business.

Lincoln Magistrates' Court was told the waste escaped over seven months and the company failed to comply with an enforcement notice issued by the Environment Agency.

Mrs Anne-Lise McDonald, prosecuting for the Agency, described falling dust and waste la­bels as 'looking like snow' at the company's site on Caenby Corner Industrial Estate at Hem­swell Cliff.

James Finch, an Environment Agency officer, first visited the site in December 2008 when a worker was advised to turn off the machine feeding label waste into a skip and not to turn it on again until a cover had been fitted. He sent a compliance report to the company, noting a breach of their permit to store and treat waste.

The site was much cleaner the next day and the skip was covered, magistrates were told, but there was still a need to enclose the label disposal operation. Three weeks later a neigh­bouring site once again was covered in dust and litter, although not as badly, said Mrs Mc­Donald, and a further compliance report was sent to the company.

Magistrates heard that on 4 February 2009, following a further complaint, Mr Finch once again went to the site and was told by the site manager that there was a problem with ma­terial escaping from a hole at the top of a silo because it hadn't been installed properly.

Mr Finch discovered that there was shredded label-like material in an interceptor and in vegetation along the Black Dyke watercourse for about 20m. He once again sent a compli­ance report to the company noting the breach of permit.

Mrs McDonald told the court that the officer sent an enforcement notice to the company on 6 February to clear up neighbouring sites, the interceptor tank and Black Dyke. The com­pany was also instructed to enclose the label treatment area and to build a solid boundary wall by 27 February in order to comply with its Environmental Permit conditions.

But the work was not complete by that date and there was still plastic flake and dust and la­bel waste on a neighbouring property. As there had been some problems with the contrac­tors the officer agreed to extend the notice for one week but two weeks later there was still dust and litter on nearby sites.

Owner of one neighbouring site said he had been told several times that the problem would be sorted out but nothing ever happened.  Plastics blowing from Eco Plastics onto his site regularly contaminated chemicals used in a dip tank which had to be replaced at £80 a time, he told the Environment Agency.

Site Manager of AWS Eco Plastics Mr Alex Coope said the dust problem had not been envis­aged and contractors had let them down.

He said the site had not been fully operational until November or December 2008 and it was only when production levels were increased that the system could not cope.

There were further complaints in May 2009 and when the Environment Agency's officer re­turned to the site he saw label and flake blowing up from ground level over the wall onto a neighbouring site, said Mrs McDonald. There was litter spilling from bags stored on the Eco Plastics site and litter blowing around the site. A week later the situation had not changed.

On 31 July, more than seven months after the first Agency visit, there was still dust and litter around and off the site and a further enforcement notice was issued. This was withdrawn later when there was a fire.

In mitigation Mr Jonathan Dunkley said that the company had appointed two new managers in order to try and improve operations on site. Since the fire the company has invested in new infrastructure as well.

After the hearing Environment Officer James Finch said: 'We always try to work with busi­nesses to make sure they comply with conditions in their environmental permit and we gave Eco Plastics numerous opportunities to clean up its operation.

'The effective running of a nearby business was affected by the activities of this company.

'The company failed to respond to advice from ourselves and continued for seven months to cause a nuisance to neighbouring sites.

'The company breached three conditions of their permit in failing to control emissions of dusts, fibres and particulates which were likely to cause pollution, harm to human health, or serious detriment to the community and failed to take measures to prevent the escape of litter. They also failed to comply with an enforcement notice.'

 

Surrey food company fined for packaging offences

A Surrey-based supplier of ready-made food products has been ordered to pay more than £7,500 for failing to comply with waste packaging legislation.

Staines Magistrates' Court fined Terbeke Pluma UK Limited £4,500 and ordered it to pay £3,032 in costs to the Environment Agency, a total of £7,532.

The company, of Whyteleafe, Surrey, pleaded guilty to failing to register with the Environ­ment Agency under the Producer Responsibility Obligations (Packaging Waste) Regulations 2007. It also failed to meet obligations to recover and recycle packaging waste in 2008 through the purchase of Packaging Recovery Notes as provided by the 2007 Regulations.

It registered under the regulations in previous years but, due to reporting requirements being misunderstood, believed it did not need to register for 2008. An Environment Agency routine check showed it had incorrectly calculated the tonnage of packaging handled as being below the registration threshold of 50 tonnes, when in fact it had handled more than 500 tonnes. The company registered for regulations under a compliance scheme in 2009.

It was estimated the company avoided costs of £2,231 by not registering and not purchasing the correct amount of Packaging Recovery Notes for 2008 alone. The company's main pack­aging activity is that of importer and seller, and materials handled include paper/cardboard, plastic, metal and ceramic packaging.

Carol Getting, investigating officer for the Environment Agency, said: "It is disappointing that although the regulations have been in force for over a decade, the requirements are still widely misunderstood. The Packaging Regulations generate more than £80 million of invest­ment into the recycling industry annually and have driven a significant reduction in packag­ing waste being disposed in landfill."

 

And another

Hatcher Components Ltd was ordered to pay £2460 in fines and £1,224 in costs and Broad­water Mouldings Ltd was fined £2460 and ordered to pay £1,224 costs by Lowestoft Magis­trates' Court.

The court heard that following a routine visit by an Environment Agency officer to Hatcher Components Ltd it was discovered that the company should have been signed up to a recy­cling scheme.

Through the investigation it was found that a subsidiary, Broadwater Mouldings Ltd, should also have been signed up to a recycling scheme, the court heard.

Magistrates were told that companies which handled in excess of 50 tonnes of packaging a year and had an annual turnover of more than £2m were obliged to join a scheme.

Where companies were linked through holding companies or as subsidiaries their aggregate turnovers and amounts of packaging handled were considered together, said Mrs Anne-Lise McDonald, prosecuting for the Agency.

'The aim of the packaging regulations is to achieve a more sustainable approach to dealing with packaging by ensuring businesses take responsibility for the packaging used in their operations. This in turn reduces the amount of packaging produced and the amount going to landfill,' said Mrs McDonald.

Magistrates were told that for each year of not being in a scheme there were three offenc­es: not being registered, failing to recover and recycle packaging and not providing a record of recycling.

Both companies pleaded guilty to failing to join a scheme during 2008 and 2009 but said that they were unaware of the Regulations. The companies each asked for three similar of­fences to be taken into consideration.

Demolition company fined for pollution

An oil spill at a former pie factory which was being demolished in Chester Road, Welling­borough was the responsibility of Deltatrax Ltd trading as BDS Specialists in Demolition, Northampton magistrates were told.

The company, pleaded guilty on to breaching the Water Resources Act and polluting the Swanspool Brook and was fined £5,000 and ordered to pay £5,073.28 costs.

Miss Claire Bentley, prosecuting for the Environment Agency, said the oil had polluted 700m of the brook and had necessitated a clean-up operation which involved both the Agency and clean-up contractors.

The offence came to light on Sunday 5 April 2010 when there was a report from a member of the public of pollution in the brook next to Castle Fields in the town. Oil was floating on the surface and an Environment Agency officer traced it back to a discharge pipe at the rear of the demolition site.

He placed booms down to try to stop it flowing any further. He could not get onto the site as it was locked and the security firm noted on the gate no longer looked after it.

On the following day he visited and found that there was evidence of an oil spill around an oil storage tank which was situated in a partly demolished building. It appeared that the tank contained red diesel.

Environment Agency officer Chris Willis went back to the discharge point and found thick oil seeping through an earth bank that had been containing some of the oil. He put down more booms and absorbent pads.

On a later visit Mr Willis was told by a member of the Deltatrax staff that there had been problems with intruders entering the site.

A drainage plan for the site, submitted as evidence by the Environment Agency in a previous case, showed a clear link between the area where the tank was sited and two areas where there was evidence of oil spill and the discharge pipe.

A representative of the site owner said he did not recognise the oil storage tank that was on the site and had no knowledge of its use there.

Company representatives failed to respond to a request from the Agency for an interview under caution about the issue, the court heard.

Miss Bentley said the risk of pollution was foreseeable as oil was being stored in a tank which had no secondary containment, was not bunded or secure.

Mr Gary Lewis, solicitor for the defendant, said that the company replaced the tank once the deficiencies were brought to its' attention by Mr Willis..

After the hearing Chris Willis said: 'Oil in the water can harm wildlife, affect fish and taint drinking water at very low concentrations. This pollution was avoidable and continued even after it was brought to the attention of the company.

'Responding to the problem straight away could have avoided this becoming such a serious matter.'

Ed - Deltatrax pleaded guilty to:

On or about 5 April 2009 you did cause poisonous, noxious or polluting matter, namely diesel or gas fuel oil, to enter controlled waters, namely the Swanspool Brook a tributary of the River Ise adjacent to Castle Fields, Chester Road, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire contrary to section 85(1) and 85(6) Water Resources Act 1991.

 

Company fined after waste is buried in grounds of Hampshire motel

A Hampshire motel company has been ordered to pay £3,700 in fines and costs for failing to remove waste from a site near the New Forest.

The waste, that included old fridges, televisions, gas canisters, plastic, bricks and rubble, had been illegally deposited and buried on land belonging to the New Forest Motel in Ringwood.

On June 15, 2008 an Environment Agency officer visited the site and saw a quantity of il­legally tipped fridges. The officer was unable to make contact with the owner, retired army Major John Hancock, who lives in Brazil.

Returning to the site on 9 October 2008 the officer noticed the fridges had been removed. A local resident said they had been buried and showed the officer where. They had been 'badly buried' along with some other wastes that was still partly visible in the soil.

A member of staff at the New Forest Motel said she would arrange for Mr Hancock to meet the Environment Agency when he next returned to the UK. Mr Hancock later told the officer the waste had been fly-tipped. He refused to answer questions as to how the waste came to be buried.

The court heard Mr Hancock is the sole director and company secretary of Matchams Lodge Limited who trade as New Forest Motel. The Environment Agency served a notice on the parent company to remove the buried waste by January 30, 2009.

On June 11, 2009 an Agency officer visited the motel again and saw that more waste had been tipped at the site. She spoke to a builder, Mr Frank Arnold, who said he was carry­ing out work at the site and said the owner, John Hancock, had instructed him to bury the waste.

After several unsuccessful attempts to contact Mr Hancock, he was finally arrested at Heath­row Airport on 20 October 2009 after landing on a flight from Rio De Janeiro and granted bail on the condition he agreed to be interviewed by the Environment Agency.

On April 14, 2010 Frank Arnold of Ferndown, Dorset was fined £2,000 and ordered to pay £1,000 costs after pleading guilty to illegally depositing waste on land at the New Forest Motel and failing to comply with two Environment Agency notices.  John Hancock was due to appear before magistrates the same day, but was too ill to fly back From Brazil. He was subsequently given a formal caution after it was explained he was el­derly, suffered from a disability and lived on a war pension in Brazil.

His company, Matchams Lodge Limited, of Hurn Road, Matchams, Ringwood, Hampshire was fined £2,700 for failing to comply with a notice to remove waste and remediate land at the New Forest Motel. It was also ordered to pay £750 costs. The case was heard on Wednesday by Lyndhurst magistrates.

'Old fridges and tv's contain hazardous and potentially toxic substances that can harm the environment. It is therefore illegal to dispose of them by burial. The defendants were given every opportunity to remove and safely dispose of these wastes, but chose to ignore the Agency's advice even after a notice had been served. We were left with no choice other than to prosecute,' said Claire McClumpha for the Environment Agency.

 

Firm banned from carrying waste and told to clean up site

Easy Skips (NE) Limited has been told it is not allowed to transport any more rubbish, after its waste carriers licence was revoked by the Environment Agency.

Its permit to run its waste transfer station at Thomlinson Road in Hartlepool has also been taken away and the company must clear all the rubbish from the site.

The company has also been given two months to remove all waste from the site. The de­cision comes after the waste management company was convicted in November 2007 of illegally depositing and keeping waste on its site, at Casebourne Road in Hartlepool, without a permit.

The company was sentenced in August 2009 - after an investigation to confiscate any profits it made from the crimes - when company directors Kevin Brough and Andrew Benson were ordered to hand over £234,393. At the time, this was the second-highest Proceeds Of Crime award ever obtained by the Environment Agency.

Easy Skips (NE) Ltd was given the opportunity to explain how it would comply with waste laws in the future, but it failed to satisfy the Environment Agency.Instead, Easy Skips (NE) Ltd has made an even bigger mountain of rubbish at its Thomlinson Road site.

Julian Carrington, Environment Agency north east environment manager, said: "Over many months Easy Skips (NE) Ltd has been collecting waste from people and dumping it at its two sites, transforming them into unsightly mountains of rubbish. By revoking Easy Skips (NE) Ltd's waste carriers licence and its permit, we have made it illegal for the company to con­tinue operating in the waste industry."

 

Biodiesel plant had potential to pollute brook

Arshad Mehmood of Hazelmere Road, Hall Green, Birmingham was fined £2,500 after pleading guilty last week to one charge relating to treating, keeping or disposing of con­trolled waste (waste oils) in a manner likely to cause pollution of the environment.

He was ordered to pay costs of £5,000 and a £15 victim surcharge.

For the Environment Agency, Counsel Nicholas Cole told Birmingham Crown Court that, in 2007, a project by the Environment Agency and its partners was underway to try improve the water quality in Washwood Heath Brook.

In March 2007, following a report of pollution where surface water flowed into the brook, a contractor working for Severn Trent Water Ltd found a white greasy substance flowing through a manhole. The surface water drains were traced back to Britannia Oils at 61 Cher­rywood Road.

Information about the incident was passed to the Environment Agency. In September 2007, two Environment Officers visited the premises, where they found a bio-diesel installation operating without a permit. The installation converted waste cooking oils from restaurants into biodiesel which could then be sold to drivers.

They found that the premises did not have the infrastructure required to adequately pre­vent pollution. In particular there was an open drain inside the building which was con­nected to the surface water drainage system which ultimately flows into Washwood Heath Brook.

The drain should have had a bund or barrier round it to prevent any oil spillages entering the drainage system and then into the Brook. Instead a loose metal tray had been placed over the drain. The Officers advised the site operators on what they needed to do to comply with the law and about the need to avoid pollution of the nearby watercourse .

In June 2008 again visited the site after reports of an oily discharge into the Brook. The pre­cautions were still not in place and the drain inside remained unprotected.

Later, while visiting a site nearby, officers saw Britannia Oils take delivery of a liquid on their forecourt. They noted that there was no infrastructure to prevent pollution running off the site and into surface water drains in the road.

Speaking after the case, an Environment Agency officer involved in the investigation, said: "There were a number of pollution incidents going on at a time when we and our partners were trying hard to improve Washwood Heath Brook for the local community.

"The defendant did not act on our advice and guidance to protect the drainage systems or provide us with the information we asked for. We cannot allow this sort of irresponsible be­haviour to continue and we hope that the outcome of today's court case will act as a deter­rent to others."

In mitigation, Counsel Mr Tim Pole said that his client regretted the incident and had since sold on the business. He had made no money out of the business that he had been operat­ing at the time but was prepared to accept that he had not taken proper measures as re­quired by the Environment Agency.

The charge was brought by the Environment Agency under Section 33 (1) ( c) of the Environ­mental Protection Act 1990.

 

Tunbridge Wells business meaty fine for slurry pollution

The Environment Agency has prosecuted a Kent meat supplier for causing animal slurry from its premises to pollute a stream that leads to the River Medway.

Forge Farm Meats Ltd of Forge Farm, Powder Lane, Southborough in Tunbridge Wells ap­peared before Sevenoaks Magistrates Court on Thursday 5 August and pleaded guilty to the offence. The company was fined £1,200, ordered to pay costs of £1,500 and a victim sur­charge of £15.

The Court heard that on 13 November 2008, Environment Agency officers visited the farm to carry out a routine inspection. On arrival at the premises, the officers saw an area where a large amount of manure and farm slurry was being stored and witnessed liquid in a small ditch which lead to the nearby Somerhill stream.

The officers took water samples at the point where the pollution was entering the ditch. Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) is a measure of the amount of oxygen taken up by bacteria living in the effluent once it enters a watercourse, and at high levels aquatic life can suffocate. Raw sewage usually has a BOD level of around 300 to 400 mg/l and suspended solids can blanket the bottom of a stream and also suffocate wildlife.

The sample taken showed a BOD level of 1,930mg/l, nearly five times the strength of raw sewage, and a suspended solids level of 2,460mg/l. The Environment Agency also paid an­other visit to the farm in February 2009 and found that there had been no changes to op­erations on site and that slurry was still escaping into the stream.

Jamie Benton of the Environment Agency said: "Prosecution is usually a last resort for us but it was clear that the company should have put in place systems for storing their farm slurry that posed no risk to the environment.

"Therefore it is disappointing that Forge Farm Meats failed to solve the problems onsite. As a result a totally avoidable pollution of an environmentally sensitive stream occurred."

Forge Farm Meats apologised for the incident and said they had a previously good environ­mental record. The company has also invested in systems on site to ensure that the offence does not happen again.

Magistrates presiding over the case said although there was no damage to the environment, there was potential for harm to be caused by polluting the stream.

 

Thames Water polluted the same river twice

Thames Water Utilities Ltd was ordered to pay £12,323 in fines and costs by Bracknell Mag­istrates Court for causing the pollution of a tributary of the River Thames twice within the space of two years.

Thames Water Utilities Ltd, based in Reading, pleaded guilty to two offences under the Wa­ter Resources Act 1991.

The court heard that in January 2008, the company's pumping infrastructure at Buckingham Avenue in Slough failed to divert a diesel spillage into a foul sewer, causing the pollution to enter a tributary of the River Thames instead. The company was also found guilty of pollut­ing the same tributary, the Haymill Stream and the Chalvey Ditch, in December 2009 after they failed to direct a leaked food effluent into the foul sewer.

The company was fined £4,000 for each offence and ordered to pay £4,323.08 costs to the Environment Agency.

In the January 2008 incident, the diesel was lost from a split pipe within the pump room of a data processing centre located in Slough Trading Estate. The oil then flowed out of the unit's drains and into the surface water road drains of the trading estate, discharging into the Buckingham Avenue balancing pond/interceptor belonging to Thames Water Utilities Ltd.

The pump within the balancing pond was supposed to pump the initial flush to the foul sewer. It was later discovered that both the primary and backup level sensors that would activate the pump either couldn't be interrogated or were not working. This meant that despite Thames Water's assurance that the pump was operational, the method to turn it on could not be guaranteed.

The court heard how the diesel (4,500 litres), once released from the balancing pond and into the Haymill Stream, flowed along a kilometre (1/2 mile) culverted section of pipe be­fore appearing in Cippenham at two locations that made up the source of the Chalvey Ditch. Despite the response by Thames Water to contain the diesel in the Cippenham area, around 50 fish in the Chalvey Ditch were killed. Thames Water worked with the Environment Agen­cy in the clear up and tracing the source and spent £97,500 in remediation measures.

Neil Martin, Investigating officer for the Environment Agency, said: "If Thames Water's pump had been working at the time of the incident, the diesel, or the majority of it, would have been diverted to the foul sewer and not into the watercourse - avoiding the death of many fish and other wildlife."

In the second incident, which happened in December 2009, the court heard how again Thames Water's infrastructure had failed to operate properly which resulted in a pollution incident at Chalvey Ditch - the same area as the January 2008 incident.

The Environment Agency was first alerted to the problem by a member of the public who reported chemical smells around the Chalvey Ditch. The stream was immediately attended by officers who were able to confirm the odour. The officers also found a growth of fungus on the streambed for around 1500 metres downstream of the culvert outfall at Earls Lane, Cippenham

Samples of the water were taken and these revealed that the stream had been polluted by an organic matter. Environment Agency officers traced the pollution to the Buckingham Avenue interceptor. This structure takes surface water drainage from the south western parts of the Trading Estate. Much of the surface water sewer infrastructure running to the balancing pond is owned by Thames Water. These sewers should only receive clean, uncon­taminated rainwater runoff. In dry conditions the balancing pond is designed to discharge to foul sewer, with a higher level overflow to the stream in rainfall conditions.

Under interview by the Environment Agency for the second offence, Thames Water revealed that while the alarms on this occasion were operational, the drains in the interceptor that should have taken the effluent to the foul sewer pumps had become blocked with silt and debris. This meant that the pollution went straight to the stream and Thames Water was unaware of the discharge until notified by the Environment Agency officers. Thames Water spent £95,000 in improvement works to the balancing pond.

The court reduced the levels of the fines due to the fact that Thames Water responded properly and responsibly - reducing the time and effort to resource these incidents. The company also spent considerable cost in clearing the affected area and works to the pond as well as cooperating with the Environment Agency.

Neil Martin said: "Both these incidents could have been avoided with a comprehensive maintenance plan and better understanding of the Buckingham Avenue site on the part of Thames Water. After the first incident a routine maintenance programme was introduced, but a lack of knowledge of how the system worked left the drains blocked up. While the pollutants originated from other companies on the estate, the pollution of the stream could have been prevented"

 

Offshore oil and gas industry warned to do better

The offshore oil and gas industry has been warned about its safety record as new statistics show increases in major injuries and unplanned hydrocarbon releases.

Figures released by the HSE show that there were 50 major injuries reported in 2009/10 - up 20 on 2008/09 and higher than the average of 42 over the previous five years. No work­ers were killed during activities regulated by HSE for the third year running.

The combined fatal and major injury rate almost doubled to 192 per 100,000 workers in 2009/10 compared with 106 in 2008/09 and 156 in 2007/08.

A marked rise was also recorded in 2009/10 of the combined number of major and signifi­cant hydrocarbon releases, regarded as potential precursors to a major incident, with a provisional total of 85. There were 61 in 2008/09 - the lowest since HSE began regulating the industry.

In 2009/10 there was a significant reduction in the minor over-three-day injury rate, main­taining a downward trend - 414 workers per 100,000 reported an injury, compared with 496 in the previous year.

443 dangerous occurrences were reported, 34 fewer than in 2008/09. The main types re­ported were hydrocarbon releases (42%), failure of equipment offshore (23%) well-related incidents (6%) and failures relating to lifting operations (9%).

Said Steve Walker, head of HSE's offshore division:

"I am pleased to see no fatalities for a third consecutive year in the areas we regulate, but the fact that 17 workers tragically died in other offshore related travel incidents in the year is a stark reminder that hazards are ever present offshore.

"Although the overall numbers of injury and dangerous occurrences are comparatively low, considering a workforce of almost 27,000 and the numbers of rigs and the continuous op­erations undertaken, this does not excuse the fact that the fatal and major injury rate has almost doubled. This year's overall health and safety picture is simply not good enough. The industry has shown it can do better and it must do in future.

I am particularly disappointed, and concerned, that major and significant hydrocarbon releases are up by more than a third on last year. This is a key indicator of how well the offshore industry is managing its major accident potential, and it really must up its game to identify and rectify the root causes of such events

"We will continue to take a tough line on companies who put their workers at risk. The chal­lenge to improve safety will be ever greater as more offshore installations exceed their origi­nal design life. Our new inspection initiative will check safety management plans to ensure ageing is being taken into account, but the responsibility for getting safety right in the first place rests where it always has - with the duty holders."

Ed - The Offshore Safety Statistics Bulletin is designed to show provisional headline figures before a more detailed statistical analysis is published in October. It records fatalities, re­portable injuries, occurrence of ill health and dangerous occurrences reported to HSE be­tween 1 April 2009 and 31 March 2010 under the Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dan­gerous Occurrences Regulations 1995 (RIDDOR)

 

Motor vehicle paint sprayers still at risk of asthma

Body shop workers are being encouraged to do more to protect themselves when paint spraying, as new research suggests that some are still putting themselves at risk of develop­ing asthma.

A report by the HSE into the use of two-pack paints containing isocyanates has identified that, while practices have improved greatly in recent years, there are still a number of areas of concern.

HSE estimates that vehicle spray painters are 80 times more likely to develop occupational asthma than the average worker in the UK because they fail to take the correct precautions.

Visits to 30 motor vehicle repair bodyshops and telephone surveys with 500 bodyshops found some sprayers and managers remain unaware of the link between breathing in iso­cyanates contained within the invisible spray mist, and developing occupational asthma.  Almost one in five bodyshop managers surveyed by telephone did not know their booth clearance times. This, combined with the finding that many sprayers are still unaware of the dangers of invisible spray mist puts workers at risk of re-entering booths too soon, making them more vulnerable to breathing in isocyanates.

Encouragingly, the study found that the vast majority of sprayers (85 per cent) do wear air-fed breathing apparatus. However, many continue to put their health at risk by lifting their visors to check the finish before the paint is dry, potentially exposing themselves to the isocyanate-containing mist.

Louise Rice from HSE said:

"We're encouraged to see that body shop managers and sprayers are generally much more aware of the risks of isocyanates and what they need to do to protect themselves, but it is worrying that the message is still not getting through to all of them.

"Occupational asthma destroys careers and lives. We appreciate that sprayers work to tight deadlines and time pressures, but they should not be gambling with their health. We will use this research to ensure we're working with industry in the most effective way to help reduce the risk to workers."

The research also considered how factors such as size of business, working hours and bonus systems, health surveillance, personal protective equipment and training impact on health and safety practices in isocyanate paint use.

 

Research shows no increased cancer risk at Greenock factory

Workers at a Scottish semi-conductor plant are not at increased risk of developing occupa­tional cancers, new research suggests.

An independent investigation carried out by the HSE and the Institute of Occupational Med­icine (IOM) has concluded that earlier concerns about occupational cancer at the National Semiconductors UK (NSUK) factory in Greenock were unfounded.

The study follows on from a report in 2001, published by HSE, which found that although the overall number of cancers in the workforce was not unusual there was a possibility that some could have been caused by work.

The new research updated the earlier study and also looked particularly at the work done by women with lung, breast and stomach cancer and men with brain cancer. It found that the number of employees with cancer is within the range expected for a workforce of a similar age and background. This was also true for each of the individual types of cancer studied.

The research failed to find any notable differences between the work done by women with breast cancer and their colleagues. It did not produce any important new results concerning work done by people with lung stomach and brain cancer.

Co-author of the report HSE's chief medical adviser and head of epidemiology, Dr John Os­man said:

"While we cannot use this type of research to prove that any workplace is completely safe, I am satisfied the findings do not indicate that NSUK staff face an increased risk of developing occupational cancer.

"This is an independent, robust piece of scientific research and we have taken our responsi­bilities to the workforce very seriously. The research does not establish a link between cancer and employment at NSUK.

"I hope both present and former employees will find some comfort in these results. They have waited patiently to discover the outcome of this research and I hope this report offers some clarity and reassurance."

In light of the findings, HSE said there are no plans for further research at NSUK although it will continue to monitor health and safety in the semiconductor manufacturing industry and will issue advice if it finds new areas of concern."

Ed In 2001, HSE published the results of research into concerns about a link between devel­oping cancer and working at NSUK in Greenock. Because the findings were not conclusive, the HSE, NSUK and the workforce agreed to a further study, updating the previous research and looking particularly at the work done by women who had developed lung, breast and stomach cancer and men who had developed brain cancer.

 

50 days left to register for CRC

Businesses race to register as September deadline looms

New figures published on 11 August 2010 by the Environment Agency show that over 1,200 organisations have already registered for the CRC Energy Efficiency Scheme. Between them these organisations have reported over half of the electricity consumption expected to be included within the scheme.

Large businesses and public sector organisations have just 50 days left to register for the mandatory scheme and the Environment Agency is now expecting an increase in registra­tions as the remaining organisations rush to sign up before the September 30 deadline.

Early projections estimated a maximum of 5,000 organisations were obliged to register for the CRC scheme. Revised figures show that the number of organisations required to partici­pate is between 3-4000, as many businesses that qualify for the CRC are owned by larger conglomerates that incorporate multiple businesses.

Tony Grayling, head of climate change and sustainable development at the Environment Agency said:

"Around a third of organisations that we expect to register for the CRC scheme have regis­tered well in advance of the deadline.  "We would urge the remaining businesses to sign up now, and not leave registration to the last minute. Our dedicated CRC helpdesk is available to help businesses through the registra­tions process."

The CRC Energy Efficiency Scheme is administered across the UK by the Environment Agen­cy. The scheme is regulated by the Environment Agency in England and Wales, the Northern Ireland Environment Agency in Northern Ireland, and the Scottish Environment Protection Agency in Scotland.

 

 

1007BRN.pdf (940.51 kb)

Buncefield - £9.5m in fines and costs

Following the explosions and fire at the Buncefield Oil Storage Depot in 2005 five companies have been ordered to pay £9.5 million. Part of this figure is made up of £1.3 million in fines for offences relating to the pollution caused. This is a record for the UK.

The sentencing hearing cake after a four-month long trial at St Albans Crown Court as some, but not all of the defendants had contested the proceedings. The presiding judge HH Mr Justice Calvert-Smith said the companies had shown "a slackness, inefficiency and a more or less complacent attitude to safety."

The prosecution of Total UK Ltd, British Pipeline Agency Ltd (BPA), Hertfordshire Oil Storage Ltd (HOSL), TAV Engineering Ltd (TAV) and Motherwell Control Systems 2003 Ltd, followed a complex investigation conducted jointly by the HSE and the Environment Agency (EA).

The investigation revealed the series of failings that led to thousands of gallons of petrol be­ing released in a large vapour cloud.

The resulting explosion registered at 2.4 on the Richter scale, injured 43 people, and de­stroyed nearby businesses. The environmental impacts of the disaster are still evident today.

The cost of dealing with the disaster has been estimated at more than £1billion, making it the most costly industrial incident in the UK.

Kevin Myers, HSE's Deputy Chief Executive, said:

"Incidents like the explosion at Buncefield are exceptionally rare. However, society rightly demands the highest of standards from the high hazard industries. Businesses in this sector must manage the risks they create effectively because when things go wrong, the conse­quences are severe and can destroy lives and shatter local communities.

"Major hazard industries must learn the lessons of events like this. From the Board room down companies must ask themselves these questions: do we understand what could go wrong; do we know what our systems are to prevent this happening; and are we getting the right information to assure us they are working effectively."

Howard Davidson, Thames Director at the Environment Agency, said:

"As a result of a successful investigation and prosecution, five companies have today been held to account for their failures.

"The Buncefield blast shattered the local community and left a long-term legacy of pollution.  It has already involved a five-year clean up operation by the oil companies involved and the Environment Agency will be a presence around the site for many years to come.

"There should be no doubt that we will always seek to prosecute those who cause serious pollution and damage the environment for future generations"

The court imposed the following sentences:

Total UK Limited after having pleaded guilty to three offences relating to breaches of health and safe and environmental pollution was fined £3.6 million and ordered to pay costs of £2.6 million

British Pipeline Agency Ltd pleaded guilty to two offences and was fined £300,000 for environmental offences and ordered to pay costs of £480,000

Hertfordshire Oil Storage Ltd was found guilty of two offences one relating to health and safety, the other for pollution and was fined £1.4 million with costs of £1 million

TAV Engineering Ltd, which designed a crucial safety switch that failed, was found guilty of one offence, fined £1,000 and ordered to pay £500 costs

Installation and maintenance company Motherwell Control Systems 2003 Ltd fined £1,000 and ordered to pay costs of £500 after being found guilty of one offence

Background

Around 5:30am on the 11 December 2005, an industrial petrol storage tank operated by HOSL started to overflow, in part due to a failure of two critical safety systems - an internal fuel levels gauge and the independent cut off switch.

By 6am, more than 250,000 litres of petrol spilled out of the tank and formed a highly flam­mable vapour cloud, which spread over 80,000m². When it ignited it caused the biggest ex­plosion in peacetime Britain. The fire tore through 23 fuel tanks on site and burned for five days. The resulting plume of smoke could be seen from space.

Special barriers designed to prevent run off of fuel and fire-fighting chemicals also failed, leading to significant pollution to the surrounding area and the groundwater under the site.

The economic cost of the incident was estimated as close to £1billion by the Major Incident Investigation Board, which also ranked the economic impact of other global petrochemical incidents.

The full list of charges and pleas is below:

Total UK Ltd , pleaded guilty to three charges on 13 November 2009:

Breaching Section 2(1) HSWA

Breaching Section 3 (1) HSWA

Breaching Section 85(1) and (6) of the Water Resources Act 1991.

Hertfordshire Oil Storage Ltd faced two charges. It:

Was found guilty of breaching Regulation 4 of the Control of Major Ac­cident Hazards Regulations 1999, which requires that "Every operator shall take all measures necessary to prevent major accidents and limit their consequences to persons and the environment".

Pleaded guilty to breaching Section 85(1) and (6) of the Water Resources Act 1991.

British Pipeline Agency Ltd , of 5-7 Alexandra Road, Hemel Hempstead, Hert­fordshire, pleaded guilty to two charges on 13 January 2009:

Breaching regulation 4 of the Control of Major Accident Hazards Regula­tions 1999.

Section 85(1) and (6) of the Water Resources Act 1991.

TAV Engineering Ltd , of The Oriel, Sydenham Road, Guildford, Surrey, was found guilty of breaching section 3(1) HSWA.

Motherwell Control Systems 2003 Ltd - c/o Rooney Associates 2nd Floor, 19 Castle Street, Liverpool - was found guilty of breaching section 3(1) HSWA

 

Exel and Imperial Tobacco fined after worker is crushed

Global logistics company, Exel Europe Ltd pleaded guilty to breaching sections 2(1) and 3(1) HSWA as did Imperial Tobacco Ltd following an incident which lead to a worker being crushed to death.

The court heard that on 7 September 2007 Gary Brooks (42), a heavy goods driver with Exel, was trying to collect a loaded trailer from the Imperial Tobacco site at Bull Close Road, Len­ton Industrial Estate, Nottingham.

Mr Brooks intended to attach the trailer to his cab. But as he was doing this the lorry gradu­ally rolled forward, trapping him between the front of the vehicle and a building. He suf­fered fatal head injuries.

The HSE investigation found that drivers working for both Exel and Imperial did not routinely apply the trailer brakes to make sure the vehicles were safely parked. Some drivers had not been properly trained or assessed and no checks had been carried out to monitor the use of trailer brakes in the yard.

Both companies had identified the risk to workers but had failed to implement appropriate control measures. Their method of working ignored published safety guidance which meant that drivers, other employees, visitors and third party contractors were all at risk.

Following the sentencing HSE Inspector Frances Bailey said:

"This case was prompted by the tragic death of Gary Brooks, which could have been avoided had the companies involved ensured that all drivers routinely followed a safe system of work. In 2008/09 12 workers in the haulage industry died at work, while a further 1,500 were seriously injured. All haulage companies should know that it is their responsibility to check on safety practices and make sure drivers are following the right procedures."

Ed - Imperial Tobacco Ltd was fined £80,000 and ordered to pay costs of £31,000; Exel Europe Ltd was fined £80,000 and ordered to pay costs of £35,800

 

Comet prosecuted following death of worker in Wrexham

Comet Group plc has been fined £75,000 following the death of a contractor who fell through a roof light at its Wrexham store. Costs of £24,446 were also imposed following the company pleading guilty to breaching s3(1) HSWA.

Paul Alker was working for a roofing contractor and was on the roof of the Comet store on Mount Street when he stepped on a roof light and fell around 25 feet onto the store floor.

Mr Alker was not wearing any fall arrest or other equipment which could have prevented his fall. He suffered multiple injuries including rib fractures, a broken collar bone and soft tissue injuries which led to a fatal pulmonary embolism on 12 June 2007.

Following the hearing, HSE inspector Debbie John said:

"Comet failed to ensure that its contractor had taken steps to prevent falls through the fragile roof lights, ultimately leading to the death of a worker. This incident could have been avoided if the roof lights at the Wrexham store had been protected and Mr Alker had been provided with appropriate safety equipment.

"The law is clear: companies must ensure contractors are competent to do the work they are hired to do, and they need to understand their responsibilities.  A safe system of work must be agreed and the company should monitor contractors to make sure they undertake work safely as agreed. My thoughts are with the family at this dif­ficult time."

A director of Mr Alker's employer Wrexham Roof Services Ltd, Steven Christopher Smith was jailed for two and a half years in November 2007 in relation to this incident. He had pleaded guilty to manslaughter, a charge under HSWA and a further charge of committing acts in­tending to pervert the course of justice.

 

Architects and construction firm fined after death

An architect's practice and a construction company involved in a Somerset development have been fined a total of £195,000 following a fatality on the site.

Express Park Construction Company Limited (EPCC), of Harley Street, London, pleaded guilty to breaching Section 3(1) HSWA for failing to manage safely subcontractors working for it.

The architects involved, Oxford Architects Partnership, of Bagley Croft, Hinksey Hill, Ox­ford, pleaded guilty to breaching Regulations 13, and 14, of the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 1994, which require designers to take safety considerations into account.

EPCC was fined £75,000 and ordered to pay costs of £68,000 and Oxford Architects Partner­ship was fined £120,000 and ordered to pay costs of £60,000 at Bristol Crown Court today.

The court heard that on 26 January 2005 David Cairns was working for EPCC sub-contrac­tors H&F Air Conditioning Limited, at the newly-built 'Exchange' building at Express Park in Bridgwater, Somerset.

Mr Cairns was working on the air conditioning plant, which was built on a platform accessed via a ladder at the edge of a flat roof. The roof only had a low parapet, which was not high enough to prevent Mr Cairns falling nine metres to the ground.

Speaking after the hearing, HSE Inspector Sue Adsett, said:

"This is a tragic case where both the failings of the construction firm and the architects led to Mr Cairns' death.  While it is rare for designers to be charged with breaching health and safety legislation, they must be aware they can be held responsible where bad design is an important contribu­tory factor to a work-place fatality.

"Designers must ensure that plant and equipment can be accessed safely, and that safety harnesses are only used as a last resort.  HSE will not hesitate to take enforcement action against any company or individual who fails to carry out their health and safety duties, especially when that failure results in a trag­edy, as in this case."

Ed

Regulation 13(2) of the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 1994 states:

"Every designer shall ensure that any design he prepares and which he is aware a. will be used for the purposes of construction work includes among the design con­siderations adequate regard to the need to avoid foreseeable risks to the health and safety of any person at work carrying out construction work or cleaning work in or on the structure at any time, or of any person who may be affected by the work of such a person at work."

"Every designer shall ensure that any design he prepares and which he is aware b. will be used for the purposes of construction work includes among the design considerations adequate regard to the need to give priority to measures which will protect all persons at work who may carry out construction work or cleaning work at any time and all persons who may be affected by the work of such persons at work over measures which only protect each person carrying out such work."

"Every designer shall cooperate with the planning supervisor and with any design­c. er who is preparing any design in connection with the same project or structure so far as is necessary to enable each of them to comply with the requirements and prohibitions placed on him in relation to the project by or under the relevant statutory provisions."

Regulation 14(a)(i) of the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 1994 states: "The planning supervisor appointed for any project shall ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, that the design of any structure compromised in the project includes among the design considerations adequate regard to the needs specified in heads (i) to (iii) of regulation 13(2)(a)..."

 

Carlisle worker's skull crushed in six metre fall

Two brothers have been fined a total of £13,000 after a worker was left with a crushed skull and permanent brain damage when he fell through an industrial roof in Carlisle. Alan Hind, from Corrie Common near Lockerbie, was helping to demolish an industrial building in Car­lisle when he fell six metres to the concrete floor below. The 28-year-old's sight, hearing and personality have been permanently affected.

The HSE prosecuted Robert and Eric Murray following the incident at Watts Yard on London Road in Carlisle on 27 February 2008.

Carlisle Crown Court heard that Robert Murray was in overall control of the project, and that his brother, Eric, was in charge of dismantling the building Mr Hind was working on. In the fall, Alan Hind suffered 16 skull fractures, broke his jaw in three places, fractured his wrist, damaged a kidney and is now deaf in his right ear and blind in his left eye. Parts of his brain were so badly damaged that they had to be removed.  Mr Hind has been unable to return to work since the incident, and had to wait six months for a titanium plate to be inserted into his damaged skull. He said:

"It was a frightening time. There was nothing to protect my brain - just skin. I was worried to go out. I didn't like to be around lots of people in case I bumped my head."

Eric Murray, trading as E.J. Murray (Steel Structures), was found guilty of a health and safety offence following a trial at Carlisle Crown Court last month.

He was prosecuted for breaching Regulation 6(3) of the Work at Height Regulations 2005 by failing to take measures to prevent workers falling and being injured.

Robert Murray, trading as Murray Structures, pleaded guilty to breaching Regulation 5 of the Work at Height Regulations 2005 by not hiring trained workers, and Regulation 29(1) of the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007 by failing to ensure the work was planned and carried out safely.

David Charnock, HSE Construction Inspector in Cumbria, said:

"Mr Hind is lucky to be alive following his fall, which could and should have been prevented. He sustained multiple injuries which will affect him for the rest of his life. Unfortunately neither Robert nor Eric Murray took the necessary safety precautions and Mr Hind suffered horrific injuries as a consequence. The workers they employed were casual labourers and did not have the skills or experience to work on industrial roofs. As this incident demonstrates, carrying out work at height can result in serious injury and even death if not properly planned. Steps must be taken to prevent people falling, and everyone involved in the work must be properly trained."

Ed - Robert Murray, of Carlyle's Place, Annan, Dumfriesshire, was fined £8,000 and ordered to pay £4,000 towards the cost of the prosecution at Carlisle Crown Court on 29 July 2010. Eric Murray, of Dalton, Lockerbie, Dumfriesshire, was fined £5,000 and ordered to pay costs of £8,000.

 

Plastics manufacturer fined following death

TS (UK) Limited a Rochdale plastics manufacturer has been fined £140,000 after a cleaner was crushed to death by a pallet of bags weighing nearly 1.5 tonnes.

The HSE prosecuted the company following the incident at the Stakehill Industrial Estate in Middleton both for failing to ensure the safety of its employees, and for not having a worker trained in First Aid on duty. The collapsed pallet of bags which caused Abel Lages' death

Manchester Crown Court heard that Abel Lages was cleaning up a spillage in the yard on 15 July 2005 when a wooden pallet, containing 55 bags of polypropylene, fell on him.

The material used in the manufacture of washing up bowls, buckets and other plastic prod­ucts can pour out if there is a tear in a bag making a stack of bags potentially unstable.

Mr Lages, 38, was found trapped under one of the collapsed pallets and died from his inju­ries at the scene.

John McGrellis, one of HSE's Principal Inspectors for Greater Manchester, said:

"Mr Lages died because TS (UK) Ltd didn't treat the health and safety of its workers as a priority. There were labels on the polypropylene bags that made it clear how they should be stored safely but this advice was ignored.

"The company didn't provide guidance about how to stack the pallets, and no one trained in First Aid was on duty to help try to resuscitate Mr Lages when the pallet fell on him.

"Since Mr Lages' death, TS (UK) Ltd has changed how it stores pallets so that it no longer stacks them on top of each other. If this action had been taken previously, Mr Lages may still be alive today."

TS (UK) Ltd pleaded guilty to breaching Section 2(1) HSWA and regulation 3(2) of the Health and Safety (First Aid) Regulations 1981.

The company was fined at Manchester Crown Court and ordered to an additional £10,588 towards the cost of the prosecution.

 

Health Protection Agency exposed staff to E.coli

The Health Protection Agency (HPA) has been fined for exposing several employees to the risk of infection of E.coli O157.

In October 2007, the staff concerned were working at the Centre for Infections in Colindale, when an amount of the bacteria spilled onto the floor of the site waste discard facility, as it was being disposed of.

The HSE investigation found that there was an overall failure to ensure safe handling of the bacteria which is classified as Hazard Group 3 waste. Biological agents are classified into one of the four hazard groups 1-4 according to their level of risk of infection, 4 being the highest.

Specifically the HPA had failed to assess the risk involved in the waste transfer and disposal process of E.coli O157 and had not properly trained employees involved in this work to en­sure it was carried out in accordance with standard operating procedures.

Some of the equipment used in this process had also been identified as being defective 18 months prior to the incident, but no action was taken to rectify this.

HPA pleaded guilty to breaching Section 2(1) HSWA at the City of London Magistrates court on 28 May. The agency has been fined £25,000 and ordered to pay £20,166.10 in costs.

Following the sentencing, HSE specialist inspector Jennifer Higham, said:

"E.coli O157 is a highly infectious and potentially deadly bacterium and there are well estab­lished practices for handling this safely. But in this case, these practices were not met, expos­ing several staff and potentially their families to a real risk of infection.

"HPA should have developed and implemented a safe system of work for dealing with E.coli O157 and for transferring and inactivating Hazard Group 3 waste. Equipment should have been well maintained and employees should have had appropriate training.

"This was a serious breach of HPA's duty to ensure the health, safety, and welfare at work of all its employees."

Ed - I find it astounding, but regrettably not that uncommon, that an 'emanation of the state' that is charged with a particular task, in this case health protection so manifestly fails to protect its own - whilst at the same time it would be very free with advice, criticism etc with others.

 

Worker injured by robot

Dura Automotive Body and Glass Systems UK Limited, a Birmingham automotive firm, has been fined £30,000 and ordered to pay £20,000 in costs after one of its employees was struck by a manufacturing robot, leaving his voice box damaged and almost paralysing him down one side of his body.

The HSE prosecuted.

Birmingham Crown Court heard how, on 6 May 2008, the injured man, Michael Brewer, was struck while trying to repair a fully-automated industrial robot.

As part of the repair, Mr Brewer wanted to see the operating cycle of the machine. Howev­er, a solid guard fully enclosed the robot so he couldn't see through it. Mr Brewer decided to view the robot from inside the guarded area while it was operating. While in this danger­ous zone, the robot struck him in the throat, causing the damage to his voicebox and nerves on one side of his body.

The HSE investigation found the company had a system of work for accessing the machine that required the machine to be put in manual before entering, rather than on the full auto­matic cycle. However, this was not adequately supervised and failed to account for a need to view the operating cycle for the machine from outside.

Inspectors also learnt that viewing the operating cycle from inside the guarded area had be­come common practice. The risk assessment the company had produced was not sufficient as it had failed to address the risks from maintenance operations or the risks posed by the industrial robots operating within the guarded area.

Since the incident took place, the company has installed large viewing panels in the guard­ing of the machine so it can be viewed from the outside, as well as improving the access arrangements and the supervision of its systems. Mr Brewer, meanwhile, will not return to work because of his injuries.

HSE inspector Edward Fryer said:

"This is a prime example of a company failing to address the risks relating to maintenance work. Maintenance personnel often have to work within the guarded area of machinery, sometimes in the face of significant production pressure. Safe access arrangements must be provided and these should be written into maintenance procedures and have full manage­ment commitment. If workers see their supervisors and managers violating procedures, as they did here, employees will feel that violations are condoned. There was a culture of viola­tion in this factory and it is very sad that it took an almost fatal accident for the company to identify this. Keeping the robot on the automatic cycle in these circumstances could very well have resulted in automatic death."

Ed Dura Automative were prosecuted for breaching Section 2(1) HSWA and Regulation 3(1) MHSWR 1999.

 

Tipper truck topppled

Humberside Aggregates and Excavations Ltd, a quarry operator, has been fined £30,000 with costs of £10,590 after a 30-tonne wheel loader vehicle overturned and slid around 4m down a sand stockpile.

The company pleaded guilty to three separate breaches of Quarries Regulations 1999.

The wheel loader after the incident

Beverly Magistrates Court heard that an employee was being trained as a wheel loader op­erator at the company's North Cave Quarry sand and gravel extraction and processing facil­ity.

On 30 October 2009, he was transporting sand from a stockpile when the access ramp edge he was driving on gave way, which caused the machine to overturn and plunge almost 4m as there were no edge protection barriers in place. The trainee lost consciousness, suffered concussion and was hospitalised for two days. The HSE prosecuted Humberside Aggregates and Excavations for failing to assess, identify and minimise potential risk, and for ultimately failing to protect the worker.

Following the hearing HSE inspector Richard Noble said:

"This accident could have been avoided had sufficient edge protection been put in place at minimal cost, which has been the standard within the quarrying industry for many years. Quarrying remains one of the most dangerous industries to work in. Since 2000 more than 3,000 workers have suffered an injury reportable to HSE and 24 people have been killed. Workplace transport is the industries biggest cause of fatal accidents within the industry, and that is why the industry and HSE work together in a joint advisory committee to intro­duce good practices for quarry operators.

"We are working very hard to reduce these accidents and fatalities. HSE produce much guid­ance on how to avoid them, so the reasons why this accident occurred are inexcusable."

For further information on quarry safety go to www.hse.gov.uk/quarries

Ed - Regulation 6 (1) of the Quarries Regulations 1999 states that: "It shall be the duty of the operator of every quarry to take the necessary measures to ensure, so far as is reason­ably practicable, that the quarry and its plant are designed, constructed, equipped, commis­sioned, operated and maintained in such a way that persons at work can perform the work assigned to them without endangering their own health and safety or the health and safety of others."

Regulation 12 (a) of the Quarries Regulations 1999 states that: "The operator shall - prepare and keep up to date a suitable written scheme for the systematic inspection, maintenance and, where appropriate, testing of - all parts of the quarry, all buildings (whether temporary or permanent) at the quarry, and any plant at the quarry with a view to securing the health and safety of those persons identified in regulation."

Regulation 13(b) of the Quarries Regulations 1999 states that "The operator shall ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, that - where necessary, effective precautions are taken, by the installation of barriers or otherwise, to prevent vehicles or plant accidentally leaving any bench or haul road"

 

Machine supplier and university fined

The University of Warwick and the firm that loaned out a harvesting machine to them, Standen Engineering Limited, have been prosecuted following a an accident resulting in a severe injury. Gareth Keal, 28, from Boston, was working on a tractor-mounted bulb har­vesting machine at the University's horticultural research site in Kirton, Boston when the incident happened.

The company pleaded guilty to breaching Regulation 11(1) of the Supply of Machinery (Safe­ty) Regulations 1992 for failing to supply machinery that met essential health and safety regulations. The University pleaded guilty to beaching Regulation 11(1)(a) of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998.

During the prosecution, Boston Magistrates' Court heard that on 13 October 2008, agency employee Mr Keal was sorting bulbs when his hand got trapped in between rollers and he was pulled into the machine up to his shoulder.

Mr Keal suffered severe soft tissue damage to his right arm including damage to the mus­cles, tendons and ligaments. As a result of his injuries he needed physiotherapy for 18 months.

The machine, which had been imported, was originally a potato harvester but had been modified before being supplied by Standen Engineering Ltd.

The HSE investigation found Standen Engineering failed to ensure the harvester satisfied es­sential health and safety requirements by preventing exposure to moving parts of the ma­chinery. In addition, the university failed to take measures to prevent access to dangerous parts of the machinery.

Standen Engineering was fined £800 with £1,726.71 costs whilst the University of Warwick was fined £3,000 with £2,091.20 costs.

HSE Inspector Scott Wynne said: "The machine was modified by Standen Engineering prior to supply and they failed to ade­quately assess the machinery's guarding. Following the supply of the machine, the defective guarding should have been identified by the University but despite several inspections, the lack of effective guarding of the rollers remained unnoticed.  Companies who intend to modify machinery prior to supply must ensure that the machin­ery is in fact safe. Both suppliers and users must ensure that dangerous parts are adequately guarded to prevent access and to ensure that workers, like Mr Keal, are not put at risk."

Ed Regulation 11(1) of the Supply of Machinery (Safety) Regulations 1992 states that: "no person shall supply relevant machinery unless the requirements of regulation 12 are com­plied with in relation thereto."

Regulation 12 (1)(a) of the Supply of Machinery (Safety) Regulations 1992 states that: "the relevant machinery satisfies the relevant essential health and safety requirements."

Regulation 11(1)(a) of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations states that: "every employer shall ensure that measures are taken to prevent access to any dangerous part of machinery or to any rotating stock-bar."

The Health and Safety Executive is Britain's national regulator for workplace health and safety. It aims to prevent death, injury and ill health. It does so through research, informa­tion and advice, promoting training, new or revised regulations and codes of practice, and working with local authority partners by inspection, investigation and enforcement. www.hse.gov.uk

 

Telford firm fined after worker loses fingers

A Telford company has been prosecuted by the HSE after one of its workers lost three fin­gers while working with machinery. A female employee, who does not want to be named, had her hand trapped in the incident at I2R Packaging Solutions, whilst making foil food cartons.

Telford Magistrates Court heard how on 22 September 2008, the employee was helping another worker remove aluminium foil from a 130-tonne power press, which had become jammed.

Her colleague had opened the protective guards which stops the machine automatically, but had not switched off the pneumatic energy. As the pneumatic system stores some energy within it - even when the power is turned off - it meant part of the machine snapped up­wards and injured the female worker's hand. A separate manual process would have been needed to ensure the pneumatic energy had been dissipated before trying to get the block­age out of the machine.

When part of the machine snapped upwards it amputated the worker's index finger, middle finger and the tip of her ring finger on her right hand.

HSE inspector Katharine Walker said:  "The injuries may not have been life threatening, but they were life changing.  Adequate safety mechanisms, to discharge the pneumatic energy automatically rather than manually, could have prevented this incident from occurring.

"While the machine had some protective guards and safety mechanisms in place, it seems they were not adequate to prevent danger to operatives during processes such as clearing blockages. This was an incident waiting to happen."

The company, based at Stafford Park, Telford, pleaded guilty to breaching Section 2(1) HSWA. It was fined £10,000 and ordered to pay £5,677 costs.

 

Worker hit by reversing fork-lift truck

Portable toilet hire firm Elliott Loohire Ltd was ordered to pay a £7,000 fine and £3,198 in prosecution costs after it admitted breaching health and safety law at Stevenage Magis­trates' Court.

The court heard that the Depot Manager, Raymond Morris, was standing in the yard area with his back turned towards the toilet wash bay at the firm's depot in Crompton Road, Ste­venage, Hertfordshire, when he was struck by a reversing fork lift truck on 18 June 2008. He suffered multiple fractures to his right foot.

An investigation by the HSE found the depot's yard had been poorly designed, and the view of drivers was obstructed. The yard also did not have adequately segregated routes separat­ing pedestrians and vehicles.

Elliott Loohire Ltd admitted breaching Section 2(1) HSWA 1974 and Regulation 17(1) of the Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992.

HSE Inspector Rauf Ahmed said:

"This incident could and should have been prevented. Workplace transport is a priority area for health and safety and workers being hit by reversing vehicles is a well known danger. Employers must ensure that the interaction between moving vehicles and pedestrians in the workplace is managed properly. If workplaces are properly designed then the chances of someone being injured like this are greatly reduced.

Ed - Since 1998/99 there has been an average of 61 fatalities each year involving workplace transport, as well as more than 2,150 major injuries.

 

United Biscuits fined following fingers being severed

One of the UK's leading food manufacturers, United Biscuits (UK) Limited has been fined £10,000 after a worker had two fingers sliced off in one of its mixing machines after an inci­dent on 9 April 2009 at a cake baking site in Halifax.

Halifax Magistrates court heard how an employee lost two fingers on her right hand when she attempted to clear a blockage in an industrial sized mixer, used to combine ingredients for flapjacks.

The investigation found the employee had to scale a two metre fixed step ladder in order to reach the machine, empty the mixture inside, and then restart it. Though the mixer had stopped, the blades inside were still rotating and when she reached in her fingers were sev­ered.

The company pleaded guilty of breaching section 2(1) HSWA 1974,

In addition to the £10,000 fine, the company was also ordered to pay £2,889 in costs.

After the hearing, HSE Inspector Rachel Brittain said:

"An incident like this should not happen in any company, but taking place in such a large scale food manufacturer such as this is absolutely unacceptable.

Preventing access to moving parts and fitting guards is an elementary and essential precau­tionary measure and inexpensive. By not putting these measures in place United Biscuits failed to fulfill its duty of care to its employees."

Construction company put workers at risk of falls

Gee Construction Ltd was the principal contractor on the site at Castlegate, Caerphilly when an HSE inspector visited on 22 October 2009.

The inspector found a number of shortcomings including unguarded lift shafts on the first and second floors, and inadequate edge protection to prevent workers from falls - one of the main causes of deaths in the construction industry.

The company pleaded guilty to breaching of Regulation 6(3) of the Work at Height Regula­tions 2005 at Caerphilly Magistrates Court on 24 May and was fined £10,000 and ordered to pay costs of £4,514.25.

Gee Construction Ltd had also previously received two prohibition notices for work at height issues in 2008 and 2009.

HSE inspector David Kirkpatrick said:

"When we visited the site, we found clear failings that left workers at risk of falling from height, and it was necessary to stop all activity above ground floor level until safe systems of work were put in place.  As principal contractors, the company was responsible for the safety of everyone on the site. It had previously received warnings from HSE and its own safety consultants about safely working at height, but clearly this advice had been ignored.

"Fortunately, despite the increased risk no-one was injured on this site, but this case must serve as a warning to companies of the need to ensure working at height is properly man­aged."

 

Worker loses lower leg after paving machine crush

A Somerset construction firm has been fined £10,000 after a worker's foot was crushed un­der a paving machine - and he had to have his lower leg amputated.

The HSE prosecuted John Wainwright & Co Ltd for its role in the incident on School Road, Monkton in Heathfield on 29 August 2008.

Taunton Magistrates Court heard that Alan Seviour, who worked for the company as a delivery driver, was carrying out some relief road work on the day of the incident. As he cleared material from the front of the surface paving machine, his foot became trapped and crushed between a speed bump and a bar at the front of the machine.

The damage to Mr Seviour's right foot was so severe that he had to have his lower leg am­putated. He still works for the company as a driver, but has to use a specially adapted van.

John Wainwright & Co Ltd of Moons Hill Quarry, Mendip Road, Stoke St Michael, Radstock, pleaded guilty to breaching Sections 2(1) and 3(1) HSWA. As well as the fine it was also or­dered to pay £8,015 in costs.

HSE inspector, Annette Walker said:

"Although the surface paver is a slow-moving machine, it is not safe for anyone to work in front of it while it is in motion as it can be noisy, making communication difficult.

"Mr Seviour suffered life-changing injuries because the machine was in motion and the driv­er had limited forward visibility because of the way the machine was designed. In fact the driver did not know Mr Seviour was trapped until he was told to reverse off him. Mr Seviour has been able to return to work now that the company has provided him with a suitable vehicle. However, it all could have been avoided if John Wainwright & Co had put the right systems in place to ensure the safety of all people working with or near this machine."

 

Frozen food specialist fined after worker loses finger

Pinguin Food Limited a Lincolnshire-based international frozen vegetable supplier has been fined after a man's finger was amputated when his hand was crushed at work.

The incident occurred at Pinguin Food's site in Boston on 10 February 2009 when the work­ er tried to straighten some boxes on an automatic palletising machine.

Boston Magistrates' Court heard that although the box loading machine which the man was working on had a perspex guard attached, the employee routinely entered the enclosure while the machinery was running.

Whilst behind the guard, his fingers were caught between a pallet and the conveyor, result­ing in his middle finger being amputated from the tip to the first knuckle. He was subse­quently off work for six months.

The company was investigated by the HSE. It was found a number of employees had been given interlock parts which effectively overrode the safety systems in place and allowed ac­cess to the enclosure.

It was fined £10,000 and ordered to pay full costs of £3,500 at Boston Magistrates' Court after pleading guilty to breaching section 2(1) of the Health & Safety at Work Act 1974.

HSE Inspector Scott Wynne said:

"Pinguin is a large international company and it is often assumed companies of this size ad­here to health and safety policies at all times.

"The employee regularly gained access to the machinery, defeating the safety device using an interlock mechanism given to him by another member of staff.

"The automatic palletising machine can carry up to a ton of boxes so the employee could easily have suffered more severe injuries. Pinguin should have had robust supervision and monitoring that should have identified staff were overriding interlocks and stopped it hap­pening."

 

Firm fined after scaffold collapse

A scaffolding contractor from Teesside has been fined after a scaffold collapsed into a public street.

The HSE prosecuted William Bedford, trading as B & J Scaffolding, following the incident in Jedburgh Street, Middlesbrough in 2008.

The aftermath of the scaffold collapse in Jedburgh Street  On the evening of 18 January, 85 metres of the scaffold overturned in the wind and col­lapsed into the street.

The HSE investigation showed that the scaffold was not adequately secured to the houses in Jedburgh Street and was missing elements used to stabilise the structure.

Mr Bedford, whose business is based at Durham Road, Redcar, pleaded guilty to breaching Section 3(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 when he appeared at Teesside Magistrates' Court. He was fined £4,000 and was ordered to pay costs of £2,500.

After the case, HSE Inspector Natalie Wright said:

"The scaffold had been used as a working platform for at least five days before the incident, by workers on site carrying out work to the house fronts. It could have collapsed at any time, creating a significant risk to workers and members of the public.

The length of Jedburgh Street was covered in scaffold

"This incident demonstrates how important it is for contractors to follow the requirements for the construction of scaffolds.

"Contractors need to ensure that they meet the relevant standards in their work to erect safe and stable scaffolds, so that they do not expose workers and members of the public to risk."

 

Pirelli fined after Carlisle worker injured by forklift truck

Tyre manufacturer Pirelli has been fined £9,000 after a worker suffered a broken leg when he was hit by a forklift truck at the company's Carlisle factory.

Allan Miller, a 62-year-old contractor, was walking through an area within the curing depart­ment at the Dalston Road site when he was struck from behind by a pallet being carried on a forklift truck. He suffered a broken leg and has been unable to return to his normal duties.  Pirelli Tyres Ltd was prosecuted by the HSE for failing to manage the risks to pedestrians in the area, including failing to inform contractors of the precautions required to ensure their safety.

North Cumbria Magistrates' Court in Carlisle heard that forklift truck drivers' vision was frequently obscured because their loads had to be lowered to avoid overhead obstructions. A previous risk assessment by Pirelli had identified that the area should be a pedestrian-free zone.

There had also been several previous incidents in the same area of the Pirelli factory in Car­lisle, involving pedestrians and forklift trucks.

Michael Griffiths, the investigating HSE inspector, said:

"Workplace transport continues to be one of the biggest causes of death and serious injury in the UK. If a person is struck by a forklift truck, or another industrial vehicle like an HGV, then the consequences are usually severe. In this case, the forklift truck was moving very slowly and yet it still broke the victim's leg.  The storage area should have been clearly marked as 'pedestrian free', and the injured worker should have been told of the risks prior to the incident in October 2009.

"Site operators should provide contractors with appropriate health and safety information, so that they can do their work safely. In practice, this means sharing information about the workplace, the routes to be used and types of vehicles and equipment on site. Specific haz­ards and other people on site, including other contractors or visiting drivers, should also be considered."

Pirelli Tyres Ltd pleaded guilty to breaching Section 3(1) HSWA. It was ordered to pay £4,282 towards the cost of the prosecution as well as the fine at North Cumbria Magis­trates' Court in Carlisle on 16 July.

 

Worker's hand severed

A court has heard how a worker had his hand torn off in an incident while working for a Peterlee company.

Details of how the employee of Conder Solutions Limited lost his hand whilst working on a metalworking lathe at the firm's premises at the town's South West Industrial Estate were heard at Peterlees Magistrates' Court.

Conder Solutions Limited, of Whitehouse Way, was fined £15,000 and also ordered to pay £2,759 in costs after pleading guilty to a health and safety offence on Friday (16 July).

During the HSE prosecution the court was told that on 3 June 2009, the 55-year-old employ­ee was polishing a rotating metal shaft on a metalworking lathe with a strip of emery cloth.

His right hand came into contact with the lathe's rotating shaft and cutting tool, resulting in his hand being ripped off. The employee was wearing gloves and holding a strip of emery cloth with both hands at the time of the accident, which is contrary to guidance contained in HSE Engineering Information Sheet no2 - 'Accidents at metalworking lathes with emery cloth'.

Surgeons were able to re-attach the hand but despite undergoing five operations, the work­er still has no feeling in the hand and is unable to use it. He was in hospital for more than five weeks and has been unable to return to work.

After the case, HSE Inspector Cain Mitchell, said:

"This employee suffered an extremely painful and possibly life-changing injury because Conder Solutions Limited failed to take measures to prevent access to dangerous parts of the lathe and to ensure a safe system of work was being used.

"This is the third incident of this kind in the North East in the last 12 months. Employers need to ensure that machines are suitable for the task. Emery cloth should only be used on a met­alworking lathe if appropriate safeguards are in place for operators, following a suitable and sufficient risk assessment."

 

Other Health and Safety Prosecutions in brief:

 

Defendants	Offences	Penalty	Details
(1)Adam Phillips Plant Hire and Contractors Limited (2) New Generation Daffodils	S2(1) HSWA S3(1) HSWA	£4,000 + £1,694 costs £1,500 + £1,634 costs	Fall from height 5m+ Absence of safe system of work; failure to plan and super­vise work effectively; absence of edge protection.
R J Baker & Co Ltd	Reg6(3) WHR 2005	£3,000 + £3,000 costs	Worker fell from telehandler after it was 'tipped' by mistake
Randell and Janes Roofing Specialists Ltd	Reg 4 WHR 2005	£2,000 + £1,500 costs	3m fall through fragile roof
Encon Engineering (Wales) Ltd	Reg 11 PUWER	£8,000 + £2,000 costs	Severed fingers and thumb
(1) John Long (2) Andrew Oliver (3) Adrian Evans	S2(1) HSWA S3(1) HSWA	£2,000 + £2,000 costs £2,000 + £2,000 costs £1,000 + £1,500 costs	8m fall (survived); Fall from height, failure to plan works
Prowash Systems Limited	S1(1) Employ­ers' Liability (Compulsory Insurance) Act 1969 x5 & s4(2)	£6,750 + £1,000 costs	Failure to have employers li­ability insurance - case proved in absence

 

Jack Moody Limited feeling moody now

Garden centre and composting site Jack Moody Limited, Hollybush Farm, Warstone Road, Shareshill has pleaded guilty to the environmental offences including treating, keeping and disposing of composting material in a way that caused pollution of the environment, contra­vening the waste management licence and knowingly allowing waste to be deposited at the site while the waste management licence was suspended.

For their offences they have been penalised £92,000 by Stafford Magistrates Court.

The district judge, Judge Taylor, rejected the argument given by the defence that there was not a commercial motivation behind the offences. The judge found that the green waste material had been processed far too quickly on site.

The court heard how Environment Agency officers had visited the site on numerous occa­sions, and after many warnings a suspension notice was served on 11 December 2007. How­ever, the site continued to receive waste between 2 and 11 January 2008 when the Waste Management Licence was suspended. The Judge concluded that this was further evidence for the commercial motivation of the company to the detriment of local residents.

The company had also been required to fence the site and prevent unauthorised access pre­viously and then again after the company had claimed that fires which had occurred on site were the result of vandalism or theft.

For the Environment Agency, counsel Barry Berlin told the court that over a lengthy period the company mismanaged the site and breached its Waste Management Licence in various respects resulting in putrid smells and polluting emissions from rotting composting material and compost fires.

Speaking after the case Doug Freakley, Environment Management Team Leader said: "We support appropriate recycling but are aware of the problems that poor management of green waste composting can cause. While we endeavour to work with site operators to re­solve issues, we will take strong enforcement action if problems are not rectified."

In mitigation defence counsel John Cooper commented that the company were experienced compost operators carrying out an important recycling activity in an industry that was still in its infancy. He claimed the company was pioneering and trying to produce a quality product for re-use. He also suggested that the company had not been given enough advice on how to extinguish fires on site, but Counsel for the Environment Agency informed the court that Staffordshire Fire and Rescue had provided appropriate advice on how to extinguish fires.

Ed- The charges were brought by the Environment Agency under the Environmental Protec­tion Act 1990. Jack Moody Limited was fined £32,000 and ordered to pay costs of £60,000, along with a £15 victim surcharge.

 

Illegal waste exports from Cumbria to Hong Kong

Sinoway International Limited has been prosecuted over hazardous waste including electri­cal and electronic equipment being illegally exported from Cumbria to Hong Kong

The company has been fined £2,000 and ordered to pay £2,700 in costs after pleading guilty at Workington Magistrates Court to illegally exporting waste electrical and electronic equip­ment to Hong Kong. On the 20 November 2009 the Environment Agency received from the Hong Kong Environ­mental Protection Department information regarding a suspected illegal shipment of haz­ardous waste from the UK The container had been inspected and opened on landing and was found to contain items of waste electrical equipment including several hundred compu­ter monitors. These are classed as hazardous waste due to the nature of some components. Documents found within the container indicated that Sinoway had exported the waste from Cumbria Recycling Limited in Workington to Hong Kong in September 2009. Environment Agency officers contacted Sinoway and Sinoway arranged for the waste to be returned im­mediately to the UK. When the container was returned to the UK in December 2009. Environment officers in­spected the container and found a number of items of waste electrical items including ca­bles, monitors, base units, components and wires. Officers found the contents to be poorly packed and some items were visibly damaged. Cumbria Recycling Ltd operate by collecting WEEE from civic amenity sites in Cumbria. The WEEE is then brought to their site for refurbishment or repair. Any items of WEEE that are deemed beyond repair are sent for reprocessing. Many of the items within the container were considered to be beyond repair by Cumbria Recycling Ltd, but instead of the waste being sent for reprocessing in the UK, it was sold to Sinoway. Cumbria Recycling Ltd stated that Sinoway were fully aware that the goods were hazardous waste. Cumbria Recycling Ltd paid for the entire contents of the container to be sent for reprocess­ing at a suitable facility in the UK once it had been returned to Cumbria. Cumbria Recycling Ltd accepted that they were involved in the illegal export, by selling the waste to Sinoway and loading the waste into the container. After the container had been re­turned to their site, they paid for the waste to be reprocessed at a suitably permitted facility in the UK. They received a formal caution from the Environment Agency. Steve Johnston, Environment Officer for the Environment Agency said, " Sinoway International Ltd exported a container of WEEE, including hazardous waste, des­tined for Hong Kong or China. Such an export of waste isn't allowed under waste regula­tions. This case sends out a strong message to other export companies that WEEE cannot be exported to other countries. The Environment Agency will continue to take enforcement action against such offenders. If the container had not been detained in Hong Kong and returned to the UK, there is a sig­nificant risk that the waste in the container would have been mishandled or tipped causing environmental harm. "

 

Frederick Dairies Ltd fined after polluting the River Tawd

Fredericks Dairies ltd has been penalised £12,000 after pollution of the River Tawd, Skelm­ersdale.

In June 2009, Environment Agency officers received complaints from members of the public that the river was a milky white colour. Initial investigations were unable to determine the source of the pollution due to the complex drainage system below Pimbo Industrial Estate .

By working with United Utilities to understand the drainage system, the pollution was traced to the surface water drains from the site operated by Fredericks Dairies Ltd. A milky white effluent was identified in the Fredericks Dairies surface water drains. Samples taken had an ice cream like odour.

During further investigations and with the co-operation of the company, it was established that part of the site used for production was wrongly connected to the surface water drain and not to the foul sewer. Investigations showed that around 13,000 litres of wash water from the ice cream manufacturing was discharged into the river over an eight day period.

Fredericks Dairies undertook a prompt clean up of the surface water drains and ensured that the drain system was correctly linked to the foul sewer to prevent a recurrence of the pollution.

The water quality of the River Tawd has improved significantly since the company has di­verted the drains.

Gareth Rogerson, Environment Officer for the Environment Agency said,

"The Environment Agency responded to reports from members of the public to a number of pollution incidents on the River Tawd in the location of Pimbo Industrial Estate. Joint investi­gations with the help of United Utilities traced the pollutant to Fredericks Dairies. Due to the organic nature of the pollutant, the pollution caused a significant impact on the water qual­ity of the river." 

Shropshire poultry farmer fined for not having a permit

David Evans, of R M & A E Evans & Son has pleaded guilty at Telford Magistrates' Court to two charges of operating a poultry unit without a permit.

Mr Evans has been fined £600 for each offence, ordered to pay £3,331 in compensation to the Environment Agency for the fees they would otherwise have received together with £1,000 costs and the ubiquitous £15 victim surcharge.

For the Environment Agency, Jill Crawford told the court that Mr Evans had been operating the poultry unit at Brunslow Farm, Lydbury North since 1997. In 2007 all poultry units over a threshold of 40,000 places were required to have a PPC permit issued under Pollution, Prevention and Control (England and Wales) Regulations 2000. As no application was made Mr Evans was operating the unit without the required permit and was therefore guilty of the offences.

Speaking after the case, Adam Shipp, Environment Officer in charge of the investigation said: "We carry out routine 'freeloader' checks of poultry and pig units to ensure that they are properly permitted. During one of these checks we came across Mr Evans and his poul­try unit at Bishops Castle where we found 54,000 birds, which is 14,000 more than he was legally allowed without a permit. We have to take this kind of enforcement action so that farmers, who have the permit, and pay subsistence fees, aren't unfairly disadvantaged."

In mitigation, the court heard it was not a deliberate evasion of the regulations but a mix up with his paperwork. He co-operated fully with the Environment Agency and now holds fewer than 40,000 birds and so does not need a permit.

 

River Irk foam iceberg prosecution

The EA has prosecuted Robert McBride Ltd for a pollution incident that caused a large amount of foam to be seen on a 5 mile stretch of the River Irk in April 2009. Robert McBride Limited pleaded guilty to causing polluting matter to enter the River Irk. The company was fined £6,600 and required to pay costs of £4,822.64. On 14 April 2009 the Environment Agency received over thirty reports of foam on the River Irk from members of the public. Environment Officers attended the scene and traced the pollution to a hole in the retaining wall of Robert McBride Ltd's site, where a brown dis­charge was entering the river and causing large amount of white foam to cover the river downstream. Officers visited the site and requested the company take action to stop the pollution entering the river. Officers took samples of the discharge and an ecological survey showed there was chemi­cal pollution which had a negative impact on the invertebrates for up to three miles down­stream. Officers also saw dead fish. The discharge was identified as bleach which is toxic to aquatic life.

In mitigation, Robert McBride Ltd indicated its guilty plea at the earliest opportunity and co­operated with the Environment Agency. In addition it had spent nearly £70,000 in stopping the pollution, investigating the cause and improving infrastructure on site. Gordon Whitaker, Environment Manager for the Environment Agency said, "We have worked with Robert McBride Ltd to ensure that the necessary action was taken to prevent any future pollution. Hopefully this prosecution will remind Robert McBride Ltd and other companies how important it is to protect the environment from pollution through preventative measures"

 

How not to recycle vehicles

In July 2010 the Environment Agency in the North West has successfully prosecuted three illegal car waste sites for operating without appropriate environmental permits.

VW Warehouse Limited has been ordered to pay costs and a fines totalling £22,755.60 for running an illegal End of Life Vehicle (ELV) site at Moorfield Industrial Estate, near Accring­ton. Following complaints from members of the public Environment Agency Officers inspected the site and found that vehicles were being dismantled on the site. The officers saw dozens of cars at various stages of disrepair along with piles of engine parts and car parts stored that were also being stored on the site. The officers identified that the activities on site needed to be carried out under and in ac­cordance with an environmental permit and yet there was no such permit in place. Follow­ing the visit, the officers delivered a pack of information including a letter explaining the unlawful activity and what they can do to ensure compliance in the future. Further visits to the site saw 80 end of life vehicles, piled two and three high. Waste vehicles were also being stored on land next to the site without a valid permit in place. At Oldham Magistrates court Mr Amjid Ali owner of Royton BMW, Milne Street in Royton was made the subject of a six month supervision order, ordered to undertake 80 hours un­paid work in the community and to pay costs of £1,000. Mr Ali had purchased the business in December 2008 which he described as servicing and repairs and selling parts off the shelf, however he had also inherited a yard with the busi­ness which contained a large number of end of life vehicles. Mr Ali said he had not run a business like this before and was unaware that it was an offence to keep or treat end of life vehicle waste without a permit. He was advised by Environment Agency officers that he should either apply for a permit or clear the site of all waste and ELVs. In November 2009 Mr Ali said he was in the process of clearing the site and all the waste would be cleared within a month. A site inspection in May 2010 confirmed waste was still present on the site. At Manchester Magistrates court, Winston Brown and Ian Kershaw pleaded guilty given a conditional discharge and ordered to pay a fine of £100 each for running an illegal car break­ers yard. The site failed to have an appropriate licence in place for their activities. On inspecting the site, Environment Officers found vehicles in a state of disrepair that had the potential to case harm to the local environment. This site was close to houses and a lo­cal watercourse. Both owners of the site had previously held permits for another site, so understood the law, but chose to ignore the legislation in place to protect the environment from harm. Steve Townhill, Environmental Crime Team Leader for the Environment Agency said, "We don't know exactly how much environmental damage is being caused by illegal operators, due to the very fact that they are illegal. We need to raise awareness that serious damage can be caused to the environment from these sites. It is hoped that we can work to reduce the supply of vehicles to illegal operators, and stop any damage before it occurs. If you're dismantling or storing waste motors that contain hazardous parts without the necessary permit in place you're breaking the law and face being prosecuted."

 

Forfeiting the proceeds of crime

A Chester-le-Street man Gary John Walker has been ordered to forfeit £35,000 he made from an illegal tip.

Mr Walker had pleaded guilty at an earlier hearing to controlled waste offences and also agreed to pay £5,000 towards the Environment Agency's prosecution costs.

At Durham Crown Court today Recorder Andrew Lees made an order under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 that Walker must hand over the £35,000 in profits, made from his offences.

Failure to pay within six months, means that Walker would be sent to prison for 18 months

In addition, Walker, 44, of Front Street, Pelton Fell, Chester-le-Street, was fined a total of £501 for two waste offences.

Lee Fish, prosecuting counsel for the Environment Agency, told the court that Walker and his wife run a company called A1 Asphalt and Tarmacadam Limited ("A1 Asphalt"), which is involved in the construction of roads, airfields and sports facilities, and also some waste removal.

Mr Fish said the reality was that Walker and company, of Shadon Way, Portobello Industrial Estate, Chester-le-Street, were effectively one and the same.

The court heard that the offences related to land at Pelton Fell Piggery in Chester-le-Street, known as the Old Piggery, which A1 Asphalt bought in 2006.  The site did not have an environmental permit, which is required for the deposit, treatment or storage of waste, and became an illegal landfill, where large volumes of waste were de­posited.

Mr Fish said the illegal activity had caused environmental damage and enabled Walker and his company to avoid the disposal and licensing costs incurred by legitimate businesses.

Environment Agency officers visited the Old Piggery in July 2008 after complaints and saw piles of rubble, bricks, concrete and soil. The waste was being flattened, resulting in trees being pushed over and down into Twizzel Burn, which runs alongside the land.

The court heard that environment officers visited the site during August 2008 and saw more construction waste, some of which had been pushed into the stream, and a new yellow ex­cavator with the name A1 Surfacing.com on the back.

On 2 September 2008 officers saw a man they believed was Walker using a mechanical dig­ger to push tarmac, concrete and boulders over the edge of the site into Twizzel Burn.

Over the next three months, officers observed fresh deposits of inert waste, and trees being cut down and damaged. Waste was being levelled and material falling into the burn, with the site in a very poor condition.

On 12 December 2008 Walker was served with a notice ordering that the site remained undisturbed but in July 2009 officers caught him red-handed depositing soil and rubble in breach of this notice. He claimed he was preparing the site to store caravans, a use he had never mentioned before.

Mr Fish told the court a technical specialist had advised that the site was totally unsuitable for waste disposal and at the time of its purchase had been densely wooded, but many of the trees had since been cut down and the land levelled with waste.

Walker and A1 Asphalt pleaded guilty at Consett Magistrates' Court on 14 June 2010 to an offence of knowingly permitting controlled waste to be deposited on the company's land between 30 July and 12 December 2008 contrary to s33(1)(a) Environmental Protection Act 1990. Walker also admitted a further controlled waste charge against him personally, dated 28 July 2009.

The case was committed to Crown Court for sentence because of the application for an or­der under the Proceeds of Crime Act. Consett magistrates said they otherwise would have dealt with the sentencing in the lower court.

Speaking after the case, environmental crime officer John Robertson said: "Waste was il­legally dumped on this site next to Twizzel Burn and Mr Walker and his company avoided a huge amount of disposal costs. They profited from the offences and undercut legitimate businesses by not paying for the waste to be disposed of properly. "If people are caught carrying out these types of offences we will seek to seize their assets and any financial gains they have made through this activity."

The company was given a conditional discharge for two years.

Packaging offences cost flooring company over £36,000

Karndean International Limited of Evesham has pleaded guilty at Worcester Magistrates Court to 9 charges relating to failure to comply with packaging waste regulations.

The charges were brought by the EA under the Producer Responsibility Regulations. Karn­dean International Limited was fined £3,300 for each offence (a total of £29,700). It was also ordered to pay compensation of £3,040 to the EA for loss of registration fees, costs of £4,026 and a victim surcharge of £15.

For the Environment Agency, Jill Crawford told the court that Karndean International Limited imports and sells flooring materials from its premises in Vale Park, Evesham.

The packaging regulations require that relevant companies should register with the EA or a compliance scheme by 7 April each year and provide evidence of waste packaging recovery and recycling.

The contacted Karndean International Ltd in May 2009 because they did not appear to be registered. Information received from the company subsequently indicated that the busi­ness had been obliged in 2006, 2007 and 2008 to register and recycle its waste.

Speaking after the case Louise Goatcher, an Environment Agency officer involved in the investigation, said "When companies such as Karndean International Ltd do not meet their recovery and recycling obligations our environment suffers and this is not acceptable. Busi­nesses have a responsibility for what happens to their waste.

"While registering would have cost less than £9,000 for the three years concerned, their ap­pearance in court has cost them well over £36,000. This case demonstrates that flouting the law does not pay in the end.

"We will continue to work with responsible businesses to reduce the amounts of packaging waste ending up in landfills, but we will also work hard to seek out and prosecute companies who fail to meet their obligations."

The Chair of the Bench said this was a very serious offence and that in the view of the mag­istrates there was a failing at board level, and corporate responsibility.

In mitigation, the company's representative said that the company had worked hard to achieve good environmental standards and took their environmental responsibilities very seriously. They were now fully complaint and had pleaded guilty at the first opportunity.

Ed - I've dealt with several of these type of offences. I may have recommended a more proactive approach to the company's defence than is suggested in this report once it had recognised it had failed to meet its obligations. Certainly a more proactive approach could have limited the adverse publicity.

Envirogreen turn green

DS Holdings Ltd, trading as Envirogreen - a waste carrier and its director Neil Stewart - of Henley Road, Slough, Berkshire have both pleaded guilty to a total of five offences under

the Water Resources Act 1991, Environmental Permitting (England & Wales) Regulations 2007, and the Hazardous Waste (England and Wastes) Regulations 2005 after virtually wip­ing out all the fish living in a tributary of the River Thames.

The offences included causing pollutants to enter the Chalvey Ditch near Cippenham, op­erating a regulated facility without an environmental permit, failing to keep a record of the hazardous waste transported and failing to complete a hazardous waste consignment note.

The company was fined £23,600 and ordered to pay £15,000 costs and £8,170 compensa­tion to the Environment Agency with a £15 victim surcharge. Mr Stewart was fined £14,000 and also ordered to pay a £15 victim surcharge.

The court heard that a tanker belonging to DS Holdings Ltd accidentally discharged approxi­mately 4,500 litres of hazardous chemicals into the Chalvey Ditch in Cippenham in Sep­tember 2009. The discharge caused near total fish mortality in the watercourse as far as its confluence with the River Thames. The fish killed included pike, an eel, perch, chub, dace, sticklebacks, roach, gudgeon, ruffe and bullheads. It also caused major damage to the mac­ro invertebrate (river insects) population.

Officers found that the stream had turned blue-grey, was covered in foam and smelled of detergent. They also found a large quantity of dead fish and other affected wildlife down­stream.

The officers followed the trail of pollution and eventually arrived at DS Holdings Ltd in Henley Road, where there was a smell in the air similar to that in the drains and streams. Numerous drums and containers of wastes were stored on site including waste oils, pesti­cides and drums marked as containing hazardous substances.

When questioned by the Environment Agency, the managing director of DS Holdings Ltd, Neil Stewart, admitted that a leak had occurred from one of the drums. He also said there had been a much larger spill from a road tanker being used to transport hazardous wastes, including cleaning products and liquid soaps, from a site in Wallingford, Oxfordshire, to an­other site for treatment and disposal. The tanker was temporarily parked at the Slough site when the hazardous liquid accidentally leaked from a blocked valve. The tanker driver tried to dislodge the blockage, but the valve opened and 4,500 litres escaped before it could be closed. The driver cleaned up the resulting spill by washing it down a drain, which unfortu­nately leads to the Chalvey Ditch.

D S Holdings, trading as Envirogreen, did not have an environmental permit to store hazard­ous waste brought to the Slough site as part of the company's waste carrier business.

Neil Martin, investigating officer for the Environment Agency, said: "I am satisfied that in passing sentence today the court has recognised the awful impact of this pollution in Slough. The pollution had a devastating effect on the area. Thousands of fish were killed in the Chalvey Ditch along with an unknown number of invertebrates along a four-kilometre stretch, and it may take years to recover."  

The Environment Agency has carried out surveys to gauge the impacts of the pollution. A biological survey revealed that the release of detergents into the ditch had a major impact on both the fish and macro invertebrate population for two kilometres, with nearly 100 per cent mortality of all groups. Four kilometres downstream of where the pollution occurred, one third of the freshwater shrimp and about one quarter of the burrowing mayfly that inhabit the area had also died.

Mr Martin added: "My message to companies which transport, store or treat any sort of waste is simple - transport and store it safely and with the appropriate permits, ensuring that it cannot leak. We will not tolerate the pollution of our rivers and neither will the courts. We will continue working on our pollution prevention campaign in the Slough area, talking to local business about managing their waste properly and providing advice with the aim of stopping this sort of incident happening again."

 

Site-Serv Limited prosecuted three times

Site Serv Limited has pleaded guilty in respect of three separate prosecutions brought by the Environment Agency in relation to their spreading operations in the North West at Ac­crington and Hyndburn Magistrates. They have been ordered to pay total fines of £19,500 and ordered to pay costs totalling £5,865.36.

(1) Barrack Fold Farm, BoltonIn February 2009, 400 tonnes of paper pulp waste was deposited in a field at Barrack Fold Farm, and between 100-200 tonnes of this waste was spread on the land without a suitable exemption being in place.

(2) Markfield Farm, PrestonIn October 2009, paper waste was transported onto the land and stored ready for spreading as per the exemption details. However, the waste was not spread as the exemptions details. The exemption states that waste should not be spread within 10m of a field boundaries or watercourses. Investigations by Environment Officers found that spreading took place within the 10m limit of the River Wyre, and on the field boundary causing an increased risk that the liming agents in the waste would alter the biological makeup of the land and affect the flora and fauna within a County Biological Heritage Site

It was found that spreading was also carried out on unregistered fields that were unsuitable for the materials and this posed a risk to the environment.

(3) Church Stile Farm, SlaidburnIn 2007 Site Serv deposited paper pulp waste in excess of the limits in the exemptions at Church Stile Farm, Slaidburn, in an area of outstanding natural beauty. Around a year later the company made a further deposit which increased the stockpile to over 4,000 tonnes of paper sludge. This is more than five times the limit allowed in the exemption.

This had still not been spread on the site two years later and as a result poses a threat to the environment with the potential of harmful elements to cause a contamination of the groundwater and watercourses nearby Stephen Watts, Environment Officer for the Environment Agency said, "The Environment Agency takes all pollution incidents seriously. Site serv is a professional re­cycling business that should understand the need for exemptions and permits to be in place for their actions.

By failing to act as their exemption states, the company's actions have had the potential to cause significant harm to the environment and to human health. "

 

Food company fined for pollution incident

On 14 July 2010, at Newark Magistrates Court, Bakkavor Foods Ltd of West Marsh Road, Spalding, Lincolnshire, pleaded guilty to polluting the Slough Dyke, a watercourse which runs through Brunel Drive, Newark, before flowing into the River Fleet.

Speaking for the Environment Agency solicitor David Rees told the court that Bakkavor Foods Ltd had acquired Laurens Patisseries Limited, of Brunel Drive Industrial Estate, Jessop Drive, in May 2005. The company manufactures cream cakes.

On 18 December 2008, Environment Officers visited Brunel Drive Industrial Estate in re­sponse to a report of pollution in the watercourse outside the Company's factory.

They discovered a white substance in the watercourse which was visible for about 200 me­tres downstream. A tanker was pumping from the watercourse. The pollution was traced to an outfall from the Company and samples of the discharge and a dye tracing test confirmed that the substance had come from the factory.

Ed - Cream is a very polluting substance in water as it is organic and uses up oxygen in the water. This use of oxygen is measured in terms of Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD). The downstream sample had levels of BOD of 653mg/l, which is greater than the BOD for un­treated sewage. This showed that there had been an impact on the quality of the water­course.

The high levels of suspended solids downstream together with the BOD level, suggested that a plume of cream had travelled downstream.

Speaking after the case, Jonathan Hall, an Environment Agency officer involved in the inves­tigation said: "Companies must take adequate precautions to ensure that equipment is prop­erly maintained and polluting material contained on site. We take cases such as this very seriously because of the impact they can have on the environment and we will not hesitate to prosecute where the circumstances justify."

In mitigation, Michael Hafren said that the company took its environmental responsibili­ties very seriously. The Incident had occurred as a result of an unexpected and previous­ly unknown equipment failure but the Company took responsibility and had put in a number of measures to ensure that such an incident did not happen again.

The charges were brought by the Environment Agency under Section 85 of the Water Resources Act 1991. Bakkavor Foods Ltd were fined £6,000 and ordered to pay costs of £2,820.57. 

 

£10,000 fine for 4x4 illegal waste site

Illegal piles of partly dismantled 4x4 vehicles were found in units behind a garage in Felthorpe, Norwich, magistrates have been told.

Keith John Abbotts pleaded guilty to running an illegal site without an environmental permit and was fined £10,000 and ordered to pay £2,110 costs.

Norwich Magistrates Court heard that the site was visited by police and the Environment Agency on 12 November 2009 to investigate illegal activities including the storage and treat­ment of hazardous waste.

Agency officers found numerous 4x4 vehicles, some of which were piled two high, Mrs Sa­rah Nicholson told the court.

She said that many of the vehicles still contained screen wash, brake fluid and engine oil which meant the vehicles are classed as hazardous and should be stored on impermeable surfaces, which they were not.

Mrs Nicholson said the officers had seen engine blocks, waste batteries, a radiator and other engine parts stored on the ground and although some of the vehicles were on a concrete pad, there was no suitable drainage or bund (raised area) surrounding the pad to capture any spilt liquids.

She told the court that there was evidence of oil spilt on the ground along with other oil residues.

The court was told that under the Hazardous Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2005, fuel oil, diesel and petrol are classified as hazardous as they are ecotoxic, carcinogenic and harmful. It must be disposed of at a suitable site which holds an appropriate permit.

Mrs Nicholson said that the minimum application fee for an environmental permit for this type of operation would be £2,545 as well as annual fees of at least £2,396, which Abbotts had avoided paying.

Abbotts told the investigating officers he had been breaking vehicles for only four weeks but said he had been renting the site since June 2009 and had wanted the site to be suitable be­fore applying for a permit. He said he had intentions of concreting the ground and providing suitable drainage and bunding.

Mrs Nicholson told the court that no application for a permit had yet been received.

After the hearing, investigating officer Roger Thomas said: 'Operating a waste site without an environmental permit is illegal. The outcome of this case highlights the seriousness of the offence and should serve as a lesson to illegal operators that we will not tolerate such activities.

'Anyone thinking of starting a waste business can contact the Environment Agency for advice and guidance to prevent falling foul of the law.'

 

Don't forget to register for CRC

Potential participants of the Carbon Reduction Commitment Energy Efficiency scheme (CRC) are reminded that they only have until the 30 September 2010 to register for the scheme.

Public and private organisations using more than 6000MWh electricity per year, equivalent to about £500,000 worth per year, must register for the CRC Energy Efficiency Scheme by September this year. It is believed the scheme will capture some five thousand UK busi­nesses.

 

HSE supports decision on Ram Brewery development

The HSE has welcomed the decision by the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government not to grant planning permission for a development at the Ram Brewery site in Wandsworth.

HSE advised Wandsworth Council against granting planning permission for the development of commercial and residential buildings, particularly the two very tall towers due to their proximity to the existing Wandsworth Gasholder station. The HSE advised that the develop­ment could put people at an increased risk should an accident occur at the Gasholder sta­tion.

The Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government called-in the application early in 2009. The HSE appeared at the planning inquiry and gave evidence about the major accident risks from the gasholder.

The Secretary of State has signalled support for HSE's advice, saying that the development would "harm public safety" and that he was not satisfied that "future occupants would be adequately protected from the safety risk".

HSE's Director of Hazardous Installations, Gordon MacDonald, said:

"The proposed development site, which would have included 829 residential units, is very close to the Wandsworth Gasholder station. In the event of a major accident, it would have been difficult to evacuate people rapidly from the upper levels of the proposed very tall tower blocks.

"HSE has more than 30 years experience in giving advice to local planning authorities on planning applications for developments that are close to major hazard installations. We base our advice on the best available scientific evidence."

Local planning authorities are required to give serious consideration and great weight to public safety issues when considering planning applications for development in the vicinity of major hazard installations.

The Secretary of State acknowledged the development would conflict with EU and national policy around hazardous installations. 

 

All is sweetness and light

The HSE has formalised a longstanding partnership with British Sugar aimed at reducing ac­cident and ill-health risks in the workplace.

David Ashton, HSE's Director of Field Operations signed a memorandum of understanding with Gino De Jaegher, Managing Director of British Sugar UK & Ireland at one of the com­pany's processing plants in Wissington, Norfolk.

The agreement marks a significant milestone in the partnership between HSE and British Sugar UK and recognises improvements to the company's safety performance over the last five years.

Tony Ellingford, Gino De Jaegher and David Ashton

As part of the agreement the HSE agrees to support British Sugar UK in its pledge to contin­ue to develop proportionate and sensible risk control systems and to improve its health and safety performance. In return British Sugar commits to championing the drive to improve workplace protections by striving to be an exemplar in occupational health and safety.

The signing was supported by both the GMB and Unite Unions on behalf of employees.

David Ashton, HSE's Director of Field Operations said:

"British Sugar has put considerable effort into making improvements to its health and safety performance over the last five years - and the results clearly demonstrate how uniting em­ployers and employees together can create safer and healthier workplaces.

When we launched the health and safety strategy last year, we made it clear that everyone has role from the board room to the shop floor. It's encouraging to see a major British em­ployer taking this on board and working so hard and with such good results to reduce work­place risks."

Gino De Jaegher, Managing Director, UK & Ireland, British Sugar commented:

"I am extremely proud of British Sugar being recognised by the Health and Safety Executive today. Health and safety is of critical importance to our business and our people, and sup­ports our vision to eliminate all injuries by thinking safety first in everything we do".

 

Engineering fellowship for the HSE

Two leading figures from the HSE have been awarded a prestigious fellowship for their work within the engineering industry.

HSE Chair, Judith Hackitt, and Head of HSE's Nuclear Directorate, Mike Weightman, were elected as Fellows of the Royal Academy of Engineering, the UK's national academy of engi­neering following its AGM.

Academy President Lord Browne of Madingley described the expertise of the elected Fel­lows as a "unique national resource". Fellows are nominated and elected by industry peers.

Judith is a chemical engineer with more than three decades of industry experience. Her work included roles at Exxon Chemicals, and Elementis Plc where she was Group Risk Man­ager with worldwide responsibility for health and safety insurance and litigation.

Said Judith: "It is a real accolade to be formally recognised by colleagues in an industry that has shaped my career and one that opened my eyes to the fundamental importance of health and safety."

Mike Weightman, a chartered engineer and chartered physicist, is HM Chief Inspector for Nuclear Installations and Head of HSE's Nuclear Directorate. He is responsible for securing the nuclear safety and security of the civilian nuclear industry and the safety of the defence nuclear industry.

Before HSE, Mike worked in the nuclear industry for 13 years fulfilling a number of manage­ment roles associated with research, operations and engineering projects. He also acted as a consultant for a major engineering consultancy and for the American Institute of Chemical Engineers.

Mike said: "Having our contribution recognised by our peers in this way is a great honour.

"We are both passionate about the importance of good engineering to health and safety, and the fellowships recognise HSE's expertise and commitment to ensuring that engineering excellence is at the heart of industry meeting the challenges of the future."

1006BRN.pdf (923.37 kb)

21-year-old employee killed

Flowserve (GB) Ltd has been fined £150,000 by Lewes Crown Court following the death of a 21-year-old employee and pleading guilty to breaching s2(1) HSWA. Costs of £66,838 were also imposed.

The prosecution followed an incident on 7 May 2008 at Flowserve’s site in Burrell Road in Haywards Heath.

Philip Locke, a 21-year-old employee at Flowserve, received fatal injuries when carrying out a pressure test on a high pressure valve. It is believed that during the test, the vent valve became detached from the machine and hit Mr Locke at high speed, causing fatal chest injuries.

The HSE investigation also found that the company had not carried out an adequate risk as­sessment and had failed to recognise the risk of parts, such as the vent valve, detaching dur­ing the pressure testing. The vent valve had not been installed correctly and there should have been a guard on the back of the machine which would have prevented the vent value injuring Mr Locke when it separated from the machine at high pressure.

HSE Inspector Russell Beckett said:

“Had Flowserve (GB) Ltd carried out a specific risk assessment on the machine it would have realised the process was unsafe. The company could easily have modified the system of work and the death of Mr Locke could have been prevented.”

 

Crushed

A worker who had only been on site for two weeks was killed when his head was crushed between concrete blocks and a metal platform.

The HSE prosecuted brick manufacturing company Hanson Building Products Ltd, after the death of Peter Clarke, 57, at the company’s distribution plant in Coleshill on 26 April 2008. The company was fined £280,000 and ordered to pay costs of £29,204 for its admitted breach of s2(1) HSWA.

Warwick Crown Court heard that Mr Clarke, from Bedworth was working next to a conveyor that transferred groups of concrete blocks from a kiln to a packaging area. His job was to remove samples of blocks for quality checking.

Sections of blocks were formed into larger groups for packaging by moving the conveyor’s direction of travel backwards and forwards.  Mr Clarke was standing next to a low bridge over the conveyor when he leaned forward to remove some blocks from the machine. Another worker changed the direction of the conveyor, crushing Mr Clarke’s head between the concrete blocks on the conveyor and the metal platform.

The operator of the 30m conveyor could not see Mr Clarke because his view was obscured.

An HSE investigation into the incident found that the company had only identified the risk of workers trapping their fingers between the blocks and the stairway.

HSE inspector Peter Snelgrove said: “This tragic incident could have been prevented if Han­son Building Products had carried out a suitable and sufficient risk assessment to identify all the hazards for workers operating in this area.  There were no safe systems of work for removing the blocks and the company failed to su­pervise Mr Clarke adequately. The area where he was working was well known as a danger zone by other workers, but he had been on site for less than two weeks and nobody had told him about the risks.”

 

Foundation Trust bed rail death of disabled man

Basildon and Thurrock University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust has been fined £50,000 following the tragic death in its care of a severely-disabled young man who was described as being ‘full of life’ and a ‘people magnet’.

Kyle Flack died at Basildon University Hospital early on 12 October 2006 after his head be­came trapped between the bottom rail surrounding his bed and the edge of the bed itself. He died from asphyxiation.

Though 20-years-old, Kyle had the body of a 12-year-old boy. He was blind, deaf, quadriple­gic and had cerebral palsy.

He had been admitted to Basildon with a stomach complaint. During the night before he died, he was found several times lying diagonally in his bed and with his head wedged be­tween the rails.

He was repositioned twice by nurses but later, despite concerns raised by a passing cleaner, no action was taken.

At around 8.20am Kyle was found lying with his head trapped between the bottom rail and the edge of the bed. Despite resuscitation attempts he could not be saved.

In February when the Trust admitted the breaches, Basildon Crown Court heard there had been a similar incident during an earlier stay at the hospital. Kyle had suffered bruising, swelling and a bleeding mouth after he forced his head part way through the rails.

Yet despite this no assessment of his needs was carried out when he was admitted in 2006 and staff had no knowledge of the previous incident. Kyle was placed in a single room with­out one-to-one care and only monitored at irregular intervals.  Investigations by HSE found the Trust had no systems in place on each ward for assessing the risk to patients from bed rails. People with cerebral palsy are known to be particularly at risk of entrapment and the issue was highlighted in Department for Health guidelines pub­lished in 2001.

The Trust’s practice for obtaining, recording and disseminating information about Kyle’s needs was found to be poor. Staff did not formally share knowledge of individual patients.

There was no system in place to alert staff to his particular needs or habits, instead staff were relied upon to remember him from previous visits or to retrieve records to read through his past medical notes.

Despite Kyle’s size he was placed in a bed with adult spacing bed rails. Had the rails been suitable for Kyle it would not have been physically possible for him to get his head through any gap.

The NHS Foundation Trust was sentenced after it admitted failing to ensure the health and safety of patients in its care, breaching s3(1) HSWA. It was fined £50,000 and ordered to pay £40,000 in costs.

Kyle’s mother Gill Flack said: “When Kyle was in our lives we woke up and went to sleep to the sound of him laughing. He was full of life, the noisiest member of our family, and dearly loved by both his friends and the wider community. When we were out with Kyle, he was a real people-magnet: his huge smile drew people to him. He loved life and lived it to his full capacity.  When you put your child into hospital, you expect him to be cared for and to pick him up once his treatment is over. There will never be closure for us as Kyle can never be replaced but through the support of HSE, this result has helped us to feel that justice has finally been done. Today marks the end of a long journey.”

HSE Inspector Sue Matthews said: “This was an entirely preventable incident that resulted in the death of a vulnerable and much-loved young man.

“Simple measures should have been taken to prevent this from happening. This would have included a thorough bedrail risk assessment being carried out by a qualified member of staff, with input from Kyle’s mother and reference to a previous bedrail injury which Kyle suffered at Basildon Hospital in 2005.

“The use of suitable bedrails and bumpers, frequent monitoring of Kyle while the bedrails were in place and proper recordkeeping by staff would also have helped prevent this tragic death.”

Ed – It is tragic when a known and obvious risk (and indeed a risk prosecuted many times previously) takes the life through human and organisational failings. I recall years ago when acting for a care home in a similar bed rail fatality being told by the manager that the indi­vidual was ‘going to die anyway.’ My outrage at such a thought remains deeply seared in me – especially as the organisation I was dealing with was an overtly Christian foundation –  but the sanctity of life appeared to have passed them by.

 

Out of control lift kills lift engineer

J. Brown Services Ltd, a Kent-based lift company has been fined following a self-employed lift engineer being crushed to death.

Andy Bates died while completing the installation of a new lift at a site near Oxford Street in Central London.

On 6 December 2005, Mr Bates, was working alone on the lift’s wiring whilst standing on the roof of the lift car at an office building at Woodstock Street, London W1.

A cable connected to a control unit used to move the lift was severed when it became wrapped around a bolt protruding from the lift shaft wall. This led to a rogue command be­ing sent to the lift’s controller causing the lift to start moving upwards.

Mr Bates became trapped between the top of the lift car and the top of the doorway as it travelled upwards, suffering fatal crush injuries.

Neither Mr Bates, nor his assistant Liam Brown, had experience of installing the type of lift control system being fitted at the site.

The Old Bailey heard the main contractor carrying out the work was Swallow Lifts Installa­tions who had sub-contracted the work to a specialist lift engineer it had worked with previ­ously. However, due to delays the sub-contractor had to leave the job uncompleted.

Swallow then sub-contracted the completion and testing of the lift to J. Brown Services Ltd who employed Mr Bates to undertake the final phases of work.

The company pleaded guilty to breaching s3(1) HSWA. The company was fined a total of £20,000 and ordered to pay costs of £25,000. J Brown Services Ltd has now stopped trading and has limited financial resources.

HSE Inspector Kevin Shorten said:

“The tragic events at Woodstock Street illustrate the critical importance of having sufficient protective features within a control system.

Just one fault sent this lift out of control. Completed lifts have many protective features and this principle cannot be ignored when lifts are being constructed. That is why the permanent car top controls should be used whenever possible, rather than temporary ones.”

 

Alpha Group Security fined following death of worker

Glasgow-based security company Alpha Group Security Ltd has been fined £7,000 following the carbon monoxide poisoning of a man employed as a security guard on a construction site at Ann Street, Burnbank. Thomas Fraser, 37, died of carbon monoxide poisoning at an on-site flat used as a base for employees.

Hamilton Sheriff Court heard a portable power generator was used inside the flat but Mr

Fraser had not been provided with proper instructions on its safe use.

The generator was operated inside the flat without appropriate ventilation. Alpha Group Security Ltd pleaded guilty to breaching s2(1) HSWA.

Following the case, Inspector Adrian Tinson said: “This tragic incident should never have happened. It is the clear duty of those who create risks to manage them and to implement safe systems of work.

“This means clear instructions should be provided to contractors and operators and checks made to ensure they understand them.

“It should not be assumed that someone knows how to operate equipment. Responsible management of risk should have ensured the safe set up and use of the portable petrol gen­erator in a well-ventilated area which could have avoided this unnecessary death.”

Ed - In March 2010, Clyde Valley Housing Association Ltd, which subcontracted Alpha Group Security Ltd, was fined £70,000 after pleading guilty to a charge under s3(1) HSWA – we car­ried that story in BRN too!

 

Council fined following death of worker

An electrician employed by East Ayrshire Council died because of failings of his employer, a court heard.

At a hearing at Kilmarnock Sheriff Court East Ayrshire Council pleaded guilty to a charge un­der section 2(1) HSWA and was fined £56,000.

The Court heard how Robert McGill, 35, suffered fatal injuries when he fell from a mobile elevated work platform, known as an airlift, that he and a colleague had been using in the gym of Kilmarnock Academy, Elmbank Drive, Kilmarnock to fix overhead lights on 6 April 2009.

The platform had been fully extended and Mr McGill had been in the basket at the top of the airlift when it was moved around the gym. The airlift became unstable and he fell to the ground and later died from his injuries.

Mr McGill and his work colleague had not received any training on how to use the airlift. In particular they had not been told it should never be moved when there is a person working in it, and that stabilisers should be properly attached to it when in use.

Speaking after the court hearing, HSE Inspector Barry Baker said:

“This was a tragic incident which highlights once again the very real risks of working at height and the consequences of failing to take reasonable safety precautions. More than 4,000 employees suffered a major injury as a result of a fall from height in 2008/09 show­ing that it should be properly planned and assessed, adequately supervised and employees given enough training to allow them to work safely. The consequences of failing to do this are frequently serious and in this case, sadly, were fatal.”

 

Aston Villa fined after worker’s three-metre fall

Aston Villa has been fined after a worker was badly injured by a fall through a roof during the redevelopment of its training ground. Two contractors from Mechanical Cleansing Ser­vices Ltd were working at the Bodymoor Heath complex near Sutton Coldfield when one of them plunged 3m through a fragile rooflight.

The company had been employed to drain fuel tanks on a roof during demolition of an old building on the site.

Stratford-on-Avon Magistrates heard that the 34-year-old worker was cleaning the tanks and fell through a rooflight as he was heading towards a ladder to get down.

He broke bones in his heels and was off work for more than six months.

The club, its contractor and Mechanical Cleansing Services’ director, Damon Roe, all admit­ted health and safety offences.

An internal ladder was blocked so Mr Roe decided to use a ladder against the outside front of the building to access the roof’s plant room. However, both he and the football club failed to inform workers of the dangers or how to avoid the risk of falling through the fragile rooflights.

HSE inspector Carol Southerd said:

“Work at height can be very dangerous if not properly planned and although the victim’s injuries were severe, they could have been much worse.  If the internal ladder had been used, then this incident would not have happened. A simple conversation with the club was all it would have taken to arrange for the blocked ladder to be cleared.  When working at height all workers must have adequate instruction, training and equip­ment. It is vital that risks are adequately assessed and managed before employees under­take tasks in hazardous locations. There was clear failure to warn the victim or his colleague of the dangerous condition of the roof or to provide safe access to the tank.”

Aston Villa Football Club Ltd admitted breaching reg 9(1) of the Work at Height Regulations 2005. It was fined £1,350 and ordered to pay £1,610 costs.

Mechanical Cleansing Services Ltd - of Aston, Birmingham - admitted breaching reg 3(6)(a) of the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999. It was fined £1,000 and ordered to pay £1,610 costs.

Damon Roe, a director of Mechanical Cleansing Services Ltd, admitted breaching s37(1) HSWA after failing to provide adequate information about access to the site for his workers. He was fined £1,000 and ordered to pay £1,610 costs. 

Ed - reg 9(1) of the Work at Height Regulations 2005 states: “Every employer shall ensure that no person at work passes across or near, or works on, from or near, a fragile surface where it is reasonably practicable to carry out work safely and under appropriate ergonomic conditions without his doing so.”

reg 3(6)(a) of the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 states: “Where the employer employs five or more employees, he shall record... the significant findings of the [risk] assessment.”

s37(1) HSWA “Where an offence under any of the relevant statutory provisions committed by a body corporate is proved to have been committed with the consent or connivance of, or to have been attributable to any neglect on the part of, any director, manager, secretary or other similar officer of the body corporate or a person who was purporting to act in any such capacity, he as well as the body corporate shall be guilty of that offence and shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly.”

Personal prosecutions of directors for breaching s37 used to be rare – but now are more common place. There are more reported this month!

 

Council and contractors fined for unsafe asbestos removal

City of Lincoln Council and County Waste (Lincs) Ltd have been prosecuted by the HSE after allowing asbestos insulation boards to be incorrectly removed.

Lincoln Magistrates’ Court heard that in June 2008 the city council was refurbishing the bathroom of a property in Winn Street in the city and contracted County Waste (Lincs) Ltd to investigate the fixing of asbestos insulation boards, with a view to their removal. How­ever, County Waste (Lincs) Ltd was not licensed to work with asbestos.

The employee carrying out the work lacked adequate information or training about the hazards from exposure to asbestos. The court was told he simply prised off the panels with a crowbar, breaking them in the process, before putting the pieces in a sack to transport to a yard for disposal.

Broken panels and pieces of asbestos debris were left on the bathroom floor of the prop­erty, and the worker walked around for the rest of the day in clothing that may have been contaminated with asbestos fibres.

After the tenant complained to the Council, employees visited the property to inspect the damage. However, they failed to tell the tenant there was a problem and did not move the family to another property for three days.

City of Lincoln Council was fined £10,000 and County Waste (Lincs) Ltd, of Exchange Road, Lincoln, was fined £4,250 and ordered to pay costs of £12,000 and £6,000 respectively after pleading guilty to a number of health and safety breaches.

HSE inspector Martin Giles said:

“The Council failed to ensure the contractor was competent to carry out the work and had no procedures in place to be followed in the event of serious and imminent danger to its employees. It failed to protect its tenants and ensure that they were not exposed to risks to their health following the release of asbestos fibres.

“Not informing the family about the seriousness of the problem and leaving them in the property for three days before rehousing them was an irresponsible and unacceptable act for a landlord.

“Because County Waste (Lincs) Ltd failed to provide adequate information, instruction and training to ensure employees liable to be exposed to asbestos were able to safeguard them­selves and others, it did nothing to prevent the spread of asbestos from the bathroom and removed the material from the property without being in an appropriately sealed receptacle or wrapping.”

The City of Lincoln Council was fined: 

• £2,000 for breaching reg 8(1)(a) MHSWR 1999 which states “Every employer shall establish and where necessary give effect to appropriate procedures to be followed in the event of serious and imminent danger to persons at work in his undertaking”; and 
• Fined £8,000 for breaching s3(1) HSWA.

County Waste (Lincs) Ltd was fined as follows:

• £1,500 for breaching reg 10(1) of the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2006, which states “Every employer shall ensure that adequate information, instruction and train­ing is given to those of his employees who are or who are liable to be exposed to as­bestos, or who supervise such employees in order to safeguard themselves and other employees.”         
•  £1,000 for breaching reg 16 CoAR, which states: “Every employer shall prevent or, where this is not reasonably practicable, reduce to the lowest level reasonably prac­ticable the spread of asbestos from any place where work under his control is carried out.” 
•  Fined £1,750 for breaching reg CoAR 24(1)(b) of the same regulations, which states: “Every employer who undertakes work with asbestos shall ensure that waste which contains asbestos is not received into or despatched from any place of work unless it is in a sealed receptacle or sealed wrapping that is clearly marked.”

 

Manager fined after 17-year-old trainee is injured

Andrew William Steel Baillie, the general manager of Sub Surface Engineering Ltd in Salterns Lane, Fareham (a diving company) has pleaded guilty to the charges brought by the HSE fol­lowing health and safety breaches that led to a teenage trainee fracturing his ankle at work .

Jonathan Holmes, who was 17 years old and from Worthing, was injured in the workshop of Sub Surface Engineering Ltd on 21 April 2008.  Mr Baillie had used an extension to one of the truck forks of a forklift to move a large sheet of steel. The extension had not been properly secured. As the plate was being moved both it and the extension slid off the fork and fell onto Mr Holmes, fracturing his ankle.

An investigation by HSE found that Mr Baillie had not been trained to drive a forklift truck.

Fareham Magistrates’ Court heard that Mr Baillie of Osborne Road, New Milton in Hamp­shire pleaded guilty to contravening s37(1) HSWA. He was fined a total of £2,500 and or­dered to pay costs of £1,000.

HSE Inspector Tracey Cartwright said: “This case emphasises the responsibility that individu­al managers and staff have for the health and safety of their colleagues, particularly vulner­able young workers.

“Adequate planning of the lifting operation and the use of suitable equipment would have avoided this injury to a young trainee. It goes without saying that anyone driving a forklift truck should be properly trained.

“Simply spending a little time considering health and safety can stop incidents like this from happening altogether.”

 

Buncefield Convictions

Ed – following the convictions at St Alban’s Crown Court the HSE and EA have made the fol­lowing joint statement. We no doubt all recall the events of 11 December 2005, the fire and the enormous plume of smoke that covered large parts of the country for weeks.

‘A jury at St Albans’ Crown Court today found TAV Engineering Ltd guilty of failing to protect workers and members of the public following an investigation into the explosion and fire at Buncefield Oil Storage Depot on 11 December 2005.

Motherwell Control Systems 2003 Ltd was found guilty earlier this week of the same charge.

Earlier this week Hertfordshire Oil Storage Limited was found guilty of failing to prevent major accidents and limit their effects. Today they also pleaded guilty to causing pollution to enter controlled waters underlying the vicinity around Buncefield.

The HSE and EA are the ‘Competent Authority’ responsible for regulating non-nuclear major hazardous industrial sites in England and Wales under the Control of Major Accident Hazard Regulations 1999 (COMAH).

As the competent authority, the HSE and EA have a responsibility to investigate major inci­dents and ensure that lessons are learned.

The Health & Safety Executive and the Environment Agency said:

“This was the biggest and most complex criminal inquiry we have worked on together – the product of many hundreds of hours of painstaking forensic investigation.  When companies put workers and members of the public at risk and cause environmental damage we will prosecute.  When the largest fire in peacetime Europe tore through the Buncefield site on that Sunday morning in December 2005, these companies had failed to protect workers, members of the public and the environment.  The scale of the explosion and fire at Buncefield was immense and it was miraculous that nobody died. Unless the high hazard industries truly learn the lessons, then we may not be that fortunate in future.”

Ed – the sentencing hearing is planned for 16 July 2010.

Total UK Ltd had already pleaded guilty to three charges as have British Pipeline Agency Ltd who has pleaded guilty to two charges.

You can download audio and visual evidence heard during the trial at http://www.hse.gov.uk/news/buncefield/index.htm

The charges brought are:

Total UK Ltd. , of 40 Clarendon Road, Watford, Hertfordshire, pleaded guilty to three charges on 13 November 2009:

• Between the 1st day of January 2003 and the 12th day of December 2005 Total 1. UK Ltd failed to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, the health, safety and welfare at work of its employees, contrary to Section 2(1) and 33(1)(a) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974.
•  Between the 1st day of January 2003 and 12th day of December 2005, Total UK 2. Ltd failed to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, that persons not in their employment were not exposed to risks to their health or safety, contrary to Sec­tions 3(1) and 33(1)(a) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974.
• Between the 10th day of December 2005 and the 31st day of December 2005, 3. Total UK Ltd caused polluting matter, namely fuel and firewater chemicals to enter controlled waters, namely ground waters in the chalk aquifer underlying the vicinity of Buncefield, contrary to s.85(1) and (6) of the Water Resources Act 1991.

Hertfordshire Oil Storage Ltd. , of 40 Clarendon Road, Watford, Hertfordshire, faced two charges:

•  Found guilty. - Between the 1st day of January 2003 and the 12th day of Decem­ber 2005, Hertfordshire Oil Storage Ltd failed to take all measures necessary to prevent major accidents and limit their consequences to persons and the en­vironment, contrary to Regulation 4 of the Control of Major Accident Hazards Regulations 1999 and section 33(1)(c) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act  1974.
•   Pleaded guilty. - Between the 10th day of December 2005 and the 31st day of December 2005, Hertfordshire Oil Storage Ltd caused polluting matter, namely fuel and firewater chemicals to enter controlled waters, namely ground waters in the chalk aquifer underlying the vicinity of Buncefield, contrary to s.85(1) and (6) of the Water Resources Act 1991.

British Pipeline Agency Ltd , of 5-7 Alexandra Road, Hemel Hempstead, Hertfordshire, pleaded guilty to two charges on 13 January 2009:

•          Between the 18th day of November 2001 and the 12th day of December 2005, British Pipeline Agency Ltd failed to take all measures necessary to prevent major accidents and limit their consequences to persons and the environment, contrary to Regulation 4 of the Control of Major Accident Hazards Regulations 1999 and section 33(1)(c) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974.
•          Between the 10th day of December 2005 and the 31st day of December 2005, British Pipeline Agency Ltd caused polluting matter, namely fuel and firewater chemicals to enter controlled waters, namely ground waters in the chalk aquifer underlying the vicinity of Buncefield, contrary to s.85(1) and (6) of the Water Resources Act 1991.

TAV Engineering Ltd. , of The Oriel, Sydenham Road, Guildford, Surrey, faced one charge:

•     Found guilty - Between the 1st day of October 2003 and the 12th day of Decem­ber 2005, TAV Engineering Limited failed to ensure, so far as is reasonably prac­ticable, that persons not in their employment were not exposed to risks to their health or safety, contrary to Sections 3(1) and 33(1)(a) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974.

Motherwell Control Systems 2003 Ltd. , c/o Rooney Associates 2nd Floor, 19 Castle Street, Liverpool, is faced one charge, (please note - a not guilty plea was entered by the judge on the company’s behalf as it is in liquidation):

•    Found guilty - Between the 28th day of September 2003 and the 12th day of December 2005 Motherwell Control Systems 2003 Limited failed to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, that persons not in their employment were not exposed to risks to their health or safety, contrary to Sections 3(1) and 33(1)(a) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974.

 

Worker crushed

ADA Machining Services Ltd has been fined £26,000 after one of its workers suffered major injuries when he became trapped in rotating machinery.

The employee was pulled into a 14-foot-high metal-shaping machine when his overalls became entangled. He was working at n Kayley Industrial Estate, Richmond Street Ashton-under-Lyme, on 2 January 2008.  The machine which injured the worker at ADA Machining Services Ltd

The 53-year-old from Manchester, who has asked not to be named, lost one finger on his right hand and badly injured another. He suffered a dozen broken ribs, a cracked breast bone and friction burns to the left hand side of his body.

ADA Machining pleaded guilty to breaching reg 11(1) PUWER. The company was ordered to pay £6,220 costs.

David Norton, the investigating inspector for HSE, said: “One of ADA’s employees suffered devastating injuries and is still unable to return to work, more than two years after he was trapped in the machine.  It’s vital that companies take action to protect employees who are required to operate po­tentially dangerous machinery. Otherwise workers will continue to be injured in the future.  The company knew that rotating parts in the machinery were potentially dangerous. If it had installed guard on the machine, as the law requires, it would have prevented someone being seriously injured.”

 

Bakery directors fined

Genaro Saiano and Dejan Durkin directors of a Bedfordshire bakery have been fined after a series of health and safety breaches exposed staff to serious danger - including electrocu­tion and exposure to flour dust.

The directors of DG Bakery Ltd, based Bedford, appeared at Bedford and Mid-Bedfordshire Magistrates’ Court.

The court heard how HSE inspectors discovered dangerously exposed live wires on the bakery’s bread conveyor belt during an unannounced inspection on 13 January 2009. The inspectors issued immediate prohibition notices ordering the directors to shut down the conveyor belt until the machinery had been made safe.

HSE inspectors also issued four improvement notices, ordering various health and safety is­sues to be resolved by a set deadline. The bakery directors were legally required to prevent access to dangerous parts of the bread conveyor belt, prevent access to dangerous parts of the bread dough mixer, arrange for electrical testing and carry out a risk assessment for exposure to flour dust. They failed to comply with the improvement notice requiring a risk assessment be carried out.

The directors admitted breaching reg 4(2) of the Electricity at Work Regulations 1989 in rela­tion to the exposed wires and for breaching the terms of the Improvement Notice in rela­tion to the risk assessment.

Mr Saiano was fined £3,000 and ordered to pay £500 costs. Mr Durkin, was fined £2,500 and ordered to pay £500 costs.

DG Bakery Ltd is a small bakery specialising in the production of Italian bread.

HSE Inspector Emma Rowlands said: “It is simply unacceptable to operate machinery with live wires exposed - someone could have been killed or suffered a serious injury. The dan­ger of electrocution is well known and advice had already been given to the bakery in 2000 regarding electrical safety.  The directors also failed to comply with an improvement notice, requiring them to carry out an important risk assessment. The risks associated with exposure to flour dust are widely known and advice had been given to the bakery in 2007. The associated health hazards in­clude irritation to the eyes and nose, occupational dermatitis and occupational asthma.  All company directors must remember they have a duty to ensure their staff arrive every day to a safe working environment. This case has shown the importance of maintaining equipment in a safe condition and HSE is planning a series of inspections in the county for later in 2010 - to raise standards and protect the people who work in bakeries.”

Ed - reg 4(2) of the Electricity at Work Regulations 1989 states: “As may be necessary to pre­vent danger, all systems shall be maintained so as to prevent, so far as is reasonably practi­cable, such danger.”

 

Elderly resident left with first degree burns

A company which runs a nursing home in Essex, Rootcroft Limited, has been fined after an elderly man was lowered into a bath filled with water possibly as hot as 72°C.

Michael Ginn (72) was living at West House Nursing Home in St Vincent’s Road, Westcliff-on-Sea, Southend, when he suffered first degree burns to his feet on 5 May 2009.

Mr Ginn, who is unable to walk, was being bathed by two care assistants. He was lowered into the bath using a hoist but immediately began to cry out that the water was too hot. Despite being quickly raised out of the bath and having his feet immersed in cold water, Mr Ginn suffered first degree burns to both feet and was kept overnight at Southend Hospital.

Rootcroft Ltd, of 71 Sunnyfield, Mill Hill, London, which runs the nursing home, appeared at Southend Magistrates’ Court today and admitted breaching Section 3(1) HSWA.

The company was fined £5,000 and ordered to pay £5,989 in costs. The company was also ordered to pay the victim £500 in compensation.

Investigations found no thermostatic mixing valve was fitted to the water supply to prevent the temperature exceeding 44°C. The bath was supplied with hot water from one of two tanks where the water was stored at 67°C and 72°C when checked by inspectors.

Staff had been instructed to check the water temperature with a thermometer before bath­ing a patient but no checks were made by management to ensure this was taking place. One member of staff told inspectors they used a gloved hand to check how hot the water was, which would have given a deceptive impression of its true temperature.

Inspectors also found residents were at risk of contracting Legionnaires’ disease as both the hot and cold water was being stored at temperatures which would have allowed bacteria to grow.

The company had also failed to act on previous guidance on the need to maintain safe hot water given by the Care Quality Commission and Essex County Council.

HSE Inspector Sue Matthews said: “Rootcroft Ltd failed in its duties and instead a vulnerable resident suffered a painful injury. This could have been worse - several fatal scaldings have occurred in healthcare settings since 2001.  This incident was entirely avoidable and could have been prevented at little cost. Thermo­static mixing valves have been required for many years where vulnerable people are being bathed and health and safety advice for care homes is readily available.  It’s unacceptable that residents were also at risk of contracting Legionnaires’ disease, which they would have been particularly vulnerable to due to their age and medical condi­tions.”

Ed – As I repeatedly observe an entirely avoidable incident

 

American Airlines fined after ground worker loses leg

American Airlines has been fined £70,000 after one of its workers had to have his leg ampu­tated following an incident at Heathrow Airport.

On the evening of 11 November 2008 ground support worker Kulwant Bhara, 45, from Slough, was preparing an aircraft at Terminal 3 at London Heathrow Airport. A 70-tonne ‘pushback tug’, used to move aircraft from the departure gate, had finished manoeuvring a plane into position and was leaving the stand.

The vehicle was reversing when it knocked Mr Bhara to the ground, running over his right leg. He fractured his right ankle and left heel and suffered cuts to his head and left leg. As a result of the incident, his right leg had to be amputated just below his hip.  Mr Bhara who has not been able to work since, said: The incident has effectively turned my life upside down and has affected both myself and my family drastically in a number of dif­ferent ways.

“Because of the difficulty of mobility, the pain I am in and the overall effect of [the] incident it means that I am unable to involve myself in the normal family events. I have to be careful at all times because of the mobility I have lost in which most people take for granted.”

The HSE showed that the tug did not have reversing lights nor an audible reversing alarm.

American Airlines Incorporated, which has its UK offices in Staines Road, Hounslow pleaded guilty to breaching regs 24 and 28(f) PUWER. The company has been fined £70,000 and ordered to pay full costs of £10,581.25 at the Central Criminal Court.

HSE Inspector John Crookes said:

“Mr Bhara suffered injuries of a life changing nature, which were in part due to American Airlines failing to follow internal guidance requiring modification to pushback tugs. By fail­ing to identify the problems with this tug over many years, the company fell well below the expected standard of safety management for a major international airline.  Vehicle movements are one of the main risks facing airside ground support workers in the aviation industry. This is why it is crucial for companies to ensure the vehicles are properly fitted with reversing lights and audible warning alarms.”

Ed – some of the rarer provisions of PUWER so here they are:

Regulation 24 of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 states: “Every employer shall ensure that work equipment incorporates any warnings or warning devices which are appropriate for reasons of health and safety.”

Regulation 28(f) of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 states: “Ev­ery employer shall ensure that, where self-propelled work equipment may, while in motion, involve risk to the safety of persons if provided for use at night or in dark places that: (i) it is equipped with lighting appropriate to the work to be carried out; and (ii) is otherwise suf­ficiently safe.

 

Boss fined £20,000 after worker loses foot

The owner of a Penrith wood processing plant has been fined £20,000 after a worker had his foot completely severed by a log shavings machine just two weeks into his new job. Costs of £6,146 were also imposed.

Allan Wilson Jenkinson, aged 56, of Clifton Moor, Clifton, Penrith, was prosecuted by the HSE.

Penrith Magistrates Court heard that a 24-year-old employee was using a chainsaw to deal with a stuck log in the log box at the end of a conveyor. He lost his balance and his right foot became caught in the 48 razor-sharp revolving blades at the bottom of the log box.  The employee, who was working alone, crawled out of the log shavings box and used a radio to call for help. He had only worked at the firm for 15 days on a temporary contract before the incident occurred on 25 June 2009. He was a keen footballer and sportsman who had an upcoming trial with a local football club.

The HSE investigation concluded that Allan Jenkinson had failed to ensure that safe systems of work associated with the shavings machine were in place. Since the incident, his com­pany has installed fixed guards around the machine to prevent workers from being able to access the conveyors and logs boxes.

Following the case, Faye Wingfield, the investigating HSE inspector, said:

“Life-changing incidents such as this one are easily preventable, and it must be a high prior­ity for employers to ensure that their workers are kept safe from serious injury and death at work.  This case illustrates the personal consequences suffered by employees when workplace risks are not managed effectively. Employers who operate machinery are required to iden­tify the risks associated with its use and establish what needs to be put in place so that work can be carried out safely. Safe systems of work should be devised and implemented, includ­ing the provision of appropriate worker training, supervision and personal protective equip­ment.”

Allan Jenkinson pleaded guilty to breaching s2(1) HSWA.

 

Recycling firm in court after worker loses leg

WSR Recycling Ltd, a recycling company has been fined £10,000 after a worker lost part of his leg when he was crushed by an 18-tonne truck.

The 46-year-old man, who has asked not to be named, was working in a tipping bay at the company’s Ditton Road site in Widnes on 14 September 2009 when he was struck by a Volvo L110E articulated shovel loader.

WSR Recycling admitted it did not ensure pedestrians and vehicles could move around the bay safely when it appeared before Halton Magistrates’ Court in Runcorn on 21 June 2010.  Chris Goddard, the investigating inspector for HSE, said:

“This worker has suffered a life-long injury as a result of a tragic incident and was very for­tunate not to have been killed. He was run over by a very heavy vehicle, so his injuries could easily have been much worse.  It was foreseeable that pedestrians would be working in the same area as trucks, and so measures should have been taken to manage the risks. The site should have been properly supervised so that workers were kept away from moving vehicles.”

WSR Recycling pleaded guilty to breaching reg 17 Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992. The company was ordered to pay £6,338 towards the cost of the prosecu­tion in addition to the fine.

Ed - reg 17 of the Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992 states: “Every workplace shall be organised in such a way that pedestrians and vehicles can circulate in a safe manner [and]...suitable measures are taken to ensure that...where vehicles and pedes­trians use the same traffic route, there is sufficient separation between them.”

 

Fined for potential asbestos exposure

A Teesside engineering firm where two workers were potentially exposed to asbestos fibres has been fined a total of £3,000 for failing to protect their employees.

Darchem Engineering Ltd, of Aberdeen pleaded guilty to breaching Regulations 10(1) and 4(3) of the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2006 at Teesside Magistrates Court.

The court heard how on 13 November 2008, two maintenance workers were relocating a junction box in the Aerospace reception area at the company’s site in Ironmasters Way, Stil­lington, Stockton on Tees. This required them to drill into asbestos insulation board without taking appropriate precautions.

Darchem Engineering Ltd failed to adequately manage the risks from asbestos on the site and as a result the two workers were potentially exposed to asbestos fibres.

When in good condition and undisturbed, asbestos-containing material presents no problem. However, when damaged or disturbed, it can release fibres that, if inhaled, can cause a number of fatal or serious respiratory conditions.

After the case, HSE Inspector Andrew Mulligan said: “Around 20 tradesmen a week are dy­ing from asbestos-related diseases. Darchem Engineering Limited failed to manage the risks from asbestos on the site, potentially exposing two of its workers to these hazardous fibres.

“A suitable and sufficient assessment should have been carried out and the company should have made sure that their employees had adequate information, instruction and training.”

Darchem Engineering Ltd was also ordered to pay £5,266.62 in costs.

 

High voltage shock lands stationery firm with fine

Chart Design Limited, a stationery manufacturer has been fined after admitting exposing a worker to a high voltage shock that left him permanently disabled.

The man was investigating a fault on a plastic welding machine when his fingers came into contact (or very close contact) with components carrying several thousand volts.

The shock severely burned his right hand and forearm, and damaged several muscles. He was hospitalised for 14 days and has since had to undergo skin grafts. He has not regained full use of his right hand and has been unable to return to work.

The investigation revealed that guard panels which should have prevented access to live cir­cuits had been removed. Inspectors discovered that no record of maintenance checks was kept for any of the machines at the factory.

The company also had no first aiders.

Chart Design Ltd - of Luxton Close, Dury Way, Wembley - pleaded guilty to breaching s2(1) HSWA at the City of London Magistrates’ Court. It was fined £4,000 and ordered to pay costs of £6,330.

HSE Inspector Kerry Williams said: “A man’s life has been turned upside down because of entirely preventable and basic safety failings. It is the responsibility of all managers to make sure that all maintenance work is properly planned and recorded and that adequate guards are fitted to all machinery when it is in use.  If these simple things had been done it is unlikely that he would have suffered these horren­dous injuries. But this incident could have been much worse - instead of losing the feeling in his fingers, he could have lost his life.”

Company failed to check for dangerous asbestos fibres

Norwegian Homes Limited was responsible for demolishing the former Cellar Cover Hotel at Droskyn Point, in Perranporth in July 2006, which was being converted into guesthouses and holiday apartments.  During a visit to the site, inspectors from the HSE discovered suspected asbestos insulation boards underneath a caravan, in polythene sacks and in the ashes of a bonfire. The samples were later confirmed as containing asbestos at the Health and Safety Laboratory.

Truro Magistrates Court heard how there were no measures in place to properly remove the asbestos-containing material, nor were there any protections in place for staff working on the site.

Norwegian Homes pleaded guilty on 26 May 2010 to breaching Regulation 15 of the Control of Asbestos at Work Regulations 2002. As well as the fine of £4,500 the company was also ordered to pay £11,942.85 in costs.

HSE inspector, Martin Lee, said:

“Norwegian Homes should have carried out a survey for the presence and quantity of asbes­tos in the building, prior to demolition. This incident was entirely preventable and the clean-up costs far outstripped the costs of a survey and safe removal of the asbestos material.”

Ed – reg 15 CAWR imposes a duty on every employer to prevent or, where this is not reason­ably practicable, reduce to the lowest level reasonably practicable, the spread of asbestos from any place where work under his control is being carried out.

 

Building firm puts workers and others at risk

Stan Alexander, a director of Alexson Homes, his son Conrad and a fellow director, Dean Ma­son were dismantling part of the roof of a former children’s home in Coalpit Lane, Brereton on 8 February 2010. There were no measures in place to prevent them falling from the roof of the building, putting them at serious risk of falling almost five metres.

The men also put other people on site at risk by dropping materials off the side of the roof in an uncontrolled manner. An investigation concluded that the roof edge should have been fitted with scaffold edge protection and a rubble chute to protect other workers on site.

Alexson Homes Limited, based at Parker Road, Ashmore Park in Wolverhampton, pleaded guilty at Stafford Magistrates Court to breaching Regulations 6(3) and 10(3) of the Work at Height Regulations 2005. As well as the fine, it was also ordered to pay £900 in costs and was fined £6,600.

Prosecuting HSE Inspector, Martin Overstall, said “All too often HSE Inspectors are called out to serious or fatal incidents in roof work where the precautions are minimal or absent - it is simply not good enough.  Alexson Homes Limited was extremely lucky that no one was injured when working in such unsafe conditions.  Building firms must plan a safe method of working, before starting to work on a site. They must put the right precautions in place to protect their workers.”

 

Women flung from fairground ride

The owner and inspector of a faulty fairground ride have been convicted of health and safety breaches after two women needed hospital treatment after being flung from it.

The HSE prosecuted the owner and the inspector of the Orbiter ride at Moxley Park Fair­ground in Bilston, West Midlands for breaching health and safety regulations.

Wolverhampton Magistrates Court heard how Jessica Oseland and Alison Foxall were on the 27-year-old revolving ride on 6 May 2006 when the incident happened.

Ms Foxall suffered head, neck and back injuries, but was released from hospital soon after the incident. However, Ms Oseland received severe spinal injuries and spent months recov­ering at a specialist centre, before moving to a specially adapted house.

Thomas Denzil Jones, of Cradley Heath, pleaded guilty to breaching reg 5 PUWER. He was fined £15,000 and ordered to pay £5,000 costs.

Fairground Inspection Services, the company tasked with carrying out safety tests on the ride, was ordered to pay £35,000 compensation to Ms Oseland after pleading guilty to breaching s3(1) HSWA.

The Orbiter featured a rotating vertical pole with six arms - each holding a cluster of spin­ning cars. The car the two women were in broke away from the arm and was flung through the air before coming to rest near an adjacent fast-food stall.

The ride had only been operating for 20 seconds and was not up to full speed when the mal­function occurred. The court heard that if it had been up to full speed, the consequences for the women, and those in the vicinity of the ride, could have been fatal.

An investigation showed the there was a failure of a weld that held the car to the ride. De­spite receiving an annual inspection, which took place just weeks before the incident, the problem was not detected.

HSE inspector Gareth Langston said: “These two young women suffered serious injuries but the results could have been much, much worse. If the ride had been at full speed, we could have been looking at a fatal incident, with possible injuries to other passengers on the ride as well as onlookers.  As the ride’s owner, Mr Jones had a duty to ensure his ride was maintained in good working order, while Fairground Inspection Services had a duty to carry out a thorough inspection. They both failed in their responsibilities and have left these two young women with life-long injuries.”

Ed - In November 2009, Fairground Inspection Services admitted failing to properly exam­ine a similar ride in Suffolk, breaching Section 3(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974. It was then ordered to pay a £8,000 fine with £1,000 costs. 

 

Sign workers injured after scaffold collapse

A County Durham man has been successfully prosecuted after he injured himself and an­other person when repairing a sign over 8m from the ground.

The HSE prosecuted Sohail Hussain, 40 based at Seaham, following the incident at the Met­ro Inn, Stockton on 19 November 2009.

The company had been hired by the manager of the Metro Inn to carry out repairs to a wind-damaged sign above the entrance to the hotel.

Mr Hussain, helped by another man, from Sunderland, erected a 4.5m scaffolding platform, on top of which was an extension ladder to get high enough to reach the sign, which was 8.62m off the ground.

Mr Hussain carried out the repair work from the ladder, whilst the other man stood on top of the platform with nothing to prevent him from falling off the edge. Due to high winds and the unstable platform, it gave way, causing both men to fall onto the hotel car park be­low.

Mr Hussain suffered injuries to his knee and the other man suffered a fractured right wrist and dislocated his right elbow.

Mr Hussain, Dalton Heights, Seaham, pleaded guilty to breaching reg 6(3) of the Work at Height Regulations when he appeared at Teesside Magistrates’ Court. He was fined £1,000 and ordered to pay costs of £1,000.

After the case, HSE Inspector Jonathan Wills said:

“Both Mr Hussain and the other man are lucky to be alive. The platform erected by Mr Hus­sain bore no resemblance to the correct standard. This incident was entirely avoidable and should not have happened. Working at height is one of the most obvious and well-known dangers for those involved in the repair or maintenance of buildings.  Not only was the scaffold unstable due to its height to base ratio, but it also did not include anything to prevent workers falling from its edge, such as guard rails.  The decision by Mr Hussain to support the ladder on top of the platform was ridiculous and utterly unacceptable. Had he used mobile elevated work equipment, such as a scissor lift, or a tied in scaffold, then this potentially fatal incident could have been avoided.”

 

Food firm sentenced after worker’s finger severed

Bradford food manufacturer Arcadia Food Industries Limited was prosecuted after an inci­dent in which the machine severed one of the employee’s fingers and badly cut the other.

Bradford Magistrates Court heard the man was preparing the machine for use when he reached into the discharge hatch of a spice mixing machine. His hand came into contact with rotating paddles within the machine. The HSE investigation found this area should have been impossible to access when the machine was running.

An HSE inspector had already warned Arcadia about insufficient guarding on equipment during an earlier inspection.

The company pleaded guilty to breaching regulation 11(1) PUWER over the incident on 6 October 2009. It was fined £4,000 and ordered to pay £3,080 costs for failing to act on the earlier warning and failing to adhere to PUWER requirements.

Following the hearing, HSE Inspector Neil Hunter said:

“The very fact Arcadia Food Industries had already been warned to improve safety makes this such a frustrating prosecution.

“Fitting suitable guards is not costly, time consuming or difficult and had they been in place this incident would not have occurred and a painful and debilitating injury could have been avoided.  A suitable and sufficient risk assessment would have identified the need for control mea­sures, such as guarding, to prevent access to moving parts within the mixing machine.

“This case clearly demonstrates the value of taking time to properly assess potential risks, to identify control measures and to act findings when issues are raised or warnings are given.”

 

Lack of traffic control leaves worker injured

A vehicle hire company, SHB Hire Limited from Hampshire, has been fined £5,000 after a worker was hit by a moving vehicle in West London.

Westminster Magistrates’ Court heard that on 29 January 2008, a mechanic working for SHB Hire Ltd was asked to repair a vehicle at the site in Uxbridge Road, Southall. In order to get the vehicle from the yard he needed to move another parked vehicle, so he reversed a Ford Transit 350 tipper.

At the time Matthew Stevens, 35, from Brentford was cleaning a different vehicle when he saw the reversing tipper coming towards him. He tried to get out of the way, by jumping on the bonnet of vehicle he was cleaning but his legs were hit by the tipper. He suffered bruis­ing and swelling to both his lower legs.

After the incident, an Improvement Notice was served by the HSE ordering the company to segregate pedestrians and organise the yard area. The notice was complied with and action has been taken to separate the valeting area and a neighbouring school’s car park.

The company pleaded guilty to breaching section 2(1) HSWA. The company was fined £5,000 and ordered to pay costs of £2,815.

Following the hearing, HSE Inspector, Jack Wilby said:

“S.H.B Hire failed to properly manage the risks and control the movement of its vehicles at its Southall site - ultimately leading to a worker becoming injured.

While the injuries in this case were minor, the poor conditions of the yard and the failure to adequately manage the risks could have easily resulted in a more serious injury.”

 

Construction company sentenced after foot amputated

A construction worker needed his foot to be amputated after it became trapped by a metal sheet being driven into the ground at an excavation site in Barry.

Barry Magistrates’ Court today heard details of the horrific incident as his employers, Mor­gan Est plc were prosecuted by the HSE for failings leading to the injury.

Clive Morgan, 46, from the Rhondda, was installing piles into the ground to prevent the col­lapse of an excavation for an underground pumping station at Barry Ponds.

Mr Morgan was standing on a horizontal beam in place to guide the pile into position, when his foot became trapped between the sheet and the beam, injuring his left foot so seriously it had to be amputated.

The company pleaded guilty to a charge under s2(1) HSWA and were fined £12,000 with costs of £11,213.

The incident happened in February 2008 and the HSE investigation demonstrated that the work Mr Morgan was involved in was not being carried out in a safe manner, in that no-one should be standing close to a metal pile as it is being lowered into position.

Ed - In March 2010 Morgan Est plc pleaded guilty to safety breaches resulting in a man’s arm being torn off at a water treatment plant in Huddersfield in March 2008. The firm was fined £6,000 and ordered to pay costs of £2,163.

The company was also ordered by the court to pay £5,000 compensation to Mr Morgan.

 

Selby company fined after explosion injures worker

A worker at a company providing anti-corrosion solutions to industry was severely injured when a build up of gas vapour in a road tanker exploded a court heard.

The employee, who does not wish to be identified, suffered a fractured skull and severe burns to the legs arms and face when gas vapours from a liquid petroleum gas (LPG) heater, previously placed in the interior of the road tanker, ignited blowing him off his feet.

Repair Protection and Maintenance Limited (RPM) of Roall Lane, Kellington, near Selby, was prosecuted by the HSE after breaching reg 4(2) of the Confined Spaces Regulations 1997, and reg 3(1) (a) MHSWR 1999 after the incident on 7 July 2008. RPM were fined £3,250 and ordered to pay costs of £2656.60.

Selby Magistrates Court heard how the man was caught in the blast when a spark from an attempt to re-light the LPG heater ignited flammable gases which had accumulated in the confined space of the tanker. The heater was being used as part of the preparation for a coating treatment.

As a result of the incident, the man has lost most of his sense of smell and his hearing has been impaired. A second worker escaped with minor injuries.

The investigation found that the heater was found not to be working when the vapours ig­nited causing the explosion.

Following the hearing HSE inspector Jacqueline Ferguson said:

“Even though the gas heater was not running, RPM’s failure to carry out a risk assessment and pre-entry testing for toxic or flammable vapours in the tanker was unacceptable.”

Ed - reg 4(2) Confined Spaces Regulations 1997 states that...”No person at work shall enter or carry out any work in or (other than as a result of an emergency) leave a confined space otherwise than in accordance with a system of work which, in relation to any relevant speci­fied risks, renders that work safe and without risks to health.”

Reg 3 (1) (a) of the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 states that “...every employer shall make a suitable and sufficient assessment of - (a) the risks to the health and safety of his employees to which they are exposed whilst they are at work.”

 

Roof fall

Woodgate Sawmills Limited, and Stanley John Frederick Stephens of The Longhope Welding Company (a partnership) were prosecuted by the HSE after Robert Stephens fell through a fragile skylight while working on the roof of a sawmill building at Mile End, Coleford, Glouc­estershire.

On 1 June 2007 Mr Stephens, 40, from Longhope, was working for his father, Stanley, along­side fellow Longhope Welding Company employees to raise the roof line of the Woodgate Sawmill building at Mile End, Coleford, when he fell 5m and landed on the concrete floor below, sustaining serious head injuries.

At a hearing before Gloucester Magistrates, Woodgate Sawmills Ltd of Hill Street, Lydney, Gloucestershire pleaded guilty to four breaches of the Construction (Design and Manage­ment) Regulations 1994 and 2007 and was fined a total of £13,320 and ordered to pay costs of £14,443.

Stanley Stephens of Church Road, Longhope, Gloucestershire pleaded guilty to breaching sections 2(1) and 3(1) HSWA. He was fined a total of £26,660 and ordered to pay costs of £14,443.

Speaking after the hearing, HSE inspector, Annette Walker, said:

“This incident highlights the extremely serious risks posed by working at height if adequate safety protection measures are not in place.  The investigation revealed significant failures in the safe systems of work for the removal of the roof sheets and also significant failure to control risks of working at height during all of the stages of the sawmill refurbishment. Robert Stephens was supervising two other em­ployees who were also at risk, one of whom was only 17 at the time of this incident.  The sawmill remained open during all of the works and employees working below were also at risk from persons or objects falling on them. Robert’s fall could easily have proved fatal.”

 

Bradford motor parts firm fined after worker injured

A Bradford company manufacturing precision parts for the motor industry has been pros­ecuted for failing to safeguard a machine that severed the tip of an employee’s finger.

Bradford Magistrates Court heard how on 10 March 2009, employee Allan Formoy, 57, from Bradford used his finger to free a mechanical jam in a machine used to feed metal pins onto a grinding line at Federal Mogul Bradford Ltd’s premises on Neville Road in the city.

Mr Formoy’s finger became trapped in the machinery and the tip was severed.

The investigation found control measures to prevent such an incident at the firm, part of global engineering giant Federal Mogul Corporation, were not in place.

Federal Mogul pleaded guilty to two health and safety breaches – reg 11(1) PUWER and reg 3 (1) MHSWR 1999. The company was fined £10,000 and ordered to pay £5,000 costs.

Following the hearing, HSE Inspector Morag Irwin said: “A suitable and sufficient risk assess­ment would have identified the need for control measures, the most obvious being guarding, to prevent access to the step feeder.

“Fitting guards is not a costly, time-consuming or difficult task, and had they been in place this incident would not have occurred and a painful injury could have been avoided.

“This case demonstrates the value in spending the time to do a suitable risk assessment, identify the control measures required and act upon these findings”.

 

Chemicals company fined for environmental offences

At Bradford Magistrates’ Court Brenntag UK Limited (“Brenntag”) pleaded guilty to three breaches of its environmental permit for its site at Albion Mills, Oxford Road, Gomersal.

The company, of Albion House, Rawdon Park, Green Lane, Yeadon, was fined £5,000 for each offence and was ordered to pay full prosecution costs of £2,567.88.

The court heard Brenntag stores, processes and manufactures and distributes inorganic chemicals at its Gomersal site, licensed under an environmental permit from the Environ­ment Agency.

Craig Burman, prosecuting for the Environment Agency, said the company was granted the permit in 2005 when trading as Albion Chemicals Limited

The court heard that the permit limits the amounts and locations of emissions to air dur­ing the manufacturing process, and requires emissions to be monitored. Other conditions include the requirement for appropriate actions following an incident and the need to notify the Environment Agency swiftly of any permit breaches.

Mr Burman said the three charges relate to an emission of particulates from the scrubbing system on 14 May 2009.

Brenntag’s environmental consultants, who carry out the monitoring, notified the com­pany of an emission breach on 5 June 2009, prompting it to check its equipment and dis­cover damage to a pump.

The company ordered a replacement pump, which was installed on 10 July 2009, but be­tween 5 June and 10 July manufactured chemicals on seven occasions. Some of these pro­cesses generated particulates through the use of zinc oxide, which can be toxic to aquatic life.

Tests later in July found emissions to be within permitted limits.

Mr Burman said Brenntag was required to notify the Environment Agency promptly that it had breached an emission limit but this was not mentioned until a routine inspection by officers on 8 October 2009.

 

Odour incident costs £20,000 in fines

On Monday 28 June 2010, Robinson Brothers Ltd of Phoenix Street, West Bromwich, plead­ed guilty at West Bromwich Magistrates Court to charges relating to the escape of odorous gas.

The charges were brought by the Environment Agency under Section 32 of the Pollution Prevention and Control Regulations 2000. Robinson Brothers Ltd were fined £10,000 and ordered to pay costs of £9,584.09 plus the victim surcharge of £15.

For the Environment Agency, Barry Berlin told the court that Robinson Brothers Ltd manu­factured various chemicals, including a liquid gas odorant which is injected into the mains gas supply to give it its characteristic smell.

The company was required under a permit issued by the Environment Agency to use the best available techniques to prevent odour from escaping during this process. The principal control was when filling and emptying vehicles, when the highly odorous gases are extract­ed to the plant’s incineration system.

On 5 August 2008, while clearing out an empty tanker, technical problems occurred which caused gas odorant to escape. Back-up systems, including the standby burner, failed to operate successfully and odorous emissions were released from the main chimney for be­tween 10 and 30 minutes, causing serious odour problems in the neighbourhood.

Multiple reports from members of the public and businesses about a smell of gas (111 calls) were received by National Grid and traced to Robinsons. They showed that the odorous plume reached as far as Brownhills some 8 miles away.

Investigations by Environment Agency officers revealed that, in addition to the technical failures, there was no written process for staff to follow in the event of a failure.

Robinsons had been on notice of the failure of the standby burner on at least two previous occasions, in October 2001 and October 2007. It had failed to ensure that best available techniques were implemented following these failures and as a result the system failed again in 2008.

Speaking after the case Ian Kelcey, an Environment Agency Officer involved in the investiga­tion said: “ This incident caused widespread nuisance and alarm to many people and should have been prevented. We will not hesitate to prosecute where such incidents occur and the circumstances justify.”

 

Southern Water fined for polluting river with raw sewage

Southern Water was fined £3,000 after it admitted polluting 2km of a Sussex stream with raw sewage, killing up to a hundred brown trout and devastating the fish population for the second time in five years.

Crawley Magistrates’ Court heard that the Environment Agency received calls from mem­bers of the public after dead fish were seen in the Sunnyside Stream in East Grinstead on 30 August 2009.

Environment officers who went to the site found nearly 100 dead brown trout along 2km of the stream. Water sampling take at the site found that dissolved oxygen in the stream was as low as 25 per cent along the stretch and there were traces of ammonia in the water.

Officers traced the source of the pollution to a sewer pipe in nearby Brooklands Park. Sub­sidence below the pipe led to it buckling and eventually breaking, which led to the sewage getting into the stream.

The court heard that a similar incident in September 2005 occurred along the same sewer line running through Brooklands Park. That killed nearly 500 fish in the same stream, and it is probable that the fish population was still recovering, which led to less deaths on this oc­casion.

The company knew that the sewer was in an environmentally sensitive location, and a Hawkeye remote telemetry system was installed in 2008. This triggers alarms if flows exceed or fall below certain thresholds. However, in this instance, because the leak was a slow one the system did not pick it up.

Environment Agency Area Manager James Humphrys said: “The Environment Agency tries

to take a constructive approach to regulation and avoid unnecessary prosecutions. This was clearly a serious incident which affected the health of the stream and led to the deaths of around 100 brown trout. The stream is also home to brook lamprey, which are a protected species.

“This is the second time the stream has been spoiled by sewage pollution, and we are pleased the court has given Southern Water a hefty financial reminder to all water compa­nies and other businesses that they must take their environmental responsibilities seriously.” Southern Water pleaded guilty to one charge of polluting a water course in breach of Water Resources Act. The court fined the company £3,000 and ordered it to pay £4,833 costs and £15 victim surcharge.

 

Large scale dumping of waste costs £14,456

Conrad Neil Arnold has pleaded guilty to four offences and Malvern Company Woodstock UK Ltd were found guilty of two charges relating to the illegal dumping of industrial, com­mercial and household waste in Guarlford, Malvern.

Mr Arnold, aged 38 of Madresfield Road, Malvern, was fined £8,000 and ordered to pay costs of £1,700 as well as a victim surcharge of £15. Woodstock UK Ltd, which knowingly permitted the illegal waste activity to take place on their land, were given a conditional dis­charge and ordered to pay costs of £4,750.

For the Environment Agency, Barrister Sasha Blackmore told Worcester Magistrates’ Court that during part of October and November 2007 Conrad Arnold operated an illegal waste transfer station under the business name Malvern Handyman Services at Woodbridge Farm, Guarlford with the permission of the landowner, Woodstock UK Ltd.

In October 2007, acting upon information received, officers from the Environment Agency, Malvern Hills District Council and the Police visited an area known as ‘The Coppice’ about 700 metres east of Woodbridge Farm.

They found large quantities of waste deposited and partially buried in an old marl pit to the left of the wood. The waste included wooden pallets, plastic tubing, guttering, a washing machine, a bath, chipboard, tyres, plastic sheeting, glass, printers, a lawn mower, LPG cylin­ders, tarmac, two cars, televisions etc.

Speaking after the case Terence Broadbent, an Environment Agency officer involved in the investigation said: “This was not just a one-off fly-tipping incident. It was an ongoing and or­ganised commercial disposal operation. We urge companies, businesses and members of the public to make sure that when they arrange for other people to take away their waste, they validate that they are using registered waste carriers. It is very simple to check their details are valid by using our website, or by directly calling “

During the hearing, District Judge Morgan said Mr Arnold was saving himself a great deal of money, but on a positive note the rubbish has now been removed.  In mitigation, the court heard how Woodstock UK Ltd had spent £12,000 on a digger and re­moved the waste in the coppice and now had locked gates to prevent entry to the premises.

The charges were brought by the Environment Agency under Section 33 (1) of the Environ­mental Protection Act 1990.

 

Fined for pollution that killed swans

Plastic bottle recycling company AWS Eco Plastics has been fined a total of £19,500 and ordered to pay full Environment Agency costs of £8,447 for twice polluting a dyke with oil at Hemswell Cliff, Gainsborough.

Lincoln Magistrates’ Court was told that the polluted dyke was in a protected zone for water abstracted by Anglian Water for drinking.

The first time oil went into the water in October 2008 it ended up in the corner of Hemswell Cliff lake and two adult mute swans from a nesting site at Helmswell Cliff died as a result, Miss Claire Bentley told the court.

Eco Plastics had contacted the Environment Agency to tell them that there had been a spill of about 1,000 litres at its site. A night workman had been filling generators on a roof with diesel from a main tank which was on the ground floor and had forgotten to turn off the pump for more than two hours.

The oil was running into surface water drains at Hemswell Cliff and into an interceptor 36 metres upstream of Hemswell Cliff Sewage Treatment Works, Miss Bentley told the court.

Environment Agency officers advised blocking drains on the roof straight away to prevent any further pollution and cleaning of the roof.

On a visit almost two weeks later an Agency officer found that booms and absorbent pads were saturated with oil, although the drain was clear further downstream before the final boom, but the roof had still not been cleaned and contaminated soil at the premises had not been removed, said Miss Bentley.

A month after the incident there was still a need for more cleaning, she said.

In March 2009 there was another spill estimated to be about 740 litres of diesel when an unknown member of staff left a pump running while filling a fork lift truck.

A month later there was still diesel mixed with algae on top of the lake although the water was much cleaner.

After the first incident a company representative told investigating officers that the arrange­ment of filling generators on the roof from the main tank on the ground was a temporary arrangement during which time the generator auto-cut off system did not work. He said the company had not had time to carry out a risk assessment.

He said the spill kit was running low as there had been a smaller spill four days before and no records of the spill had been kept because the records system was new.  After the second incident, the former site manager told investigating officers that the mem­ber of staff who had left the pump running had not been authorised to fill the fork lift truck. An alarm only activated when the pump was on automatic mode but on this occasion it had been on manual mode. He admitted that the procedures had not been revised since the first spill.

Since then, he said, a new Standard Operating Procedure for diesel pumping had been intro­duced, a secure padlock had been fitted to the generator room door, an audible and visual alarm had been fitted to the day tank and outlets from the tank plugged. The company planned to switch from diesel to gas.

Miss Bentley told the court that in both pollutions there had been significant environmental impact for about 650 metres downstream, adversely affecting the amenity and chemical water quality. ‘There was evidence of poor management on site.’

‘Both incidents required extensive clean-up measures with the clean-up contractors still visit­ing the site for more than a month after each incident.’

In mitigation, Jonathan Dunkley said that in August 2009 the site suffered a devastating fire in which temperatures reached 850 degrees centigrade yet no diesel was lost from the me­chanical infrastructure. He said that this was testament to the measures the company had taken since the second spill.

After the hearing Environment Agency officer James Finch said: “Unfortunately oil pollution is a common problem, and a lack of infrastructure and poor management are not accept­able. Pollution Prevention should be common practice.

“The second incident was completely foreseeable as procedures had not been adequately improved since the first spill.

“We want to work with businesses to protect the environment from pollution through pre­ventative measures. However, when the environment is damaged; the polluter must pay.”

 

Fined £12,000

The Environment Agency and Lancashire Police have helped to secure £315,500 in fines and costs under the Proceeds of Crime Act and environmental legislation, for ‘organised crime’ carried out in Lancaster.

David Peters and Tracey Noble pleaded guilty to offences concerning the operation of a scrap metal yard, at Preston Crown Court. They were ordered to forfeit items from the business including a forklift truck and an HGV, as well as receiving a hefty fine. The site did not have the required environmental permits in place to carry out these activities, and was undercutting legitimate businesses.

Both defendants could face imprisonment if they fail to pay the debts within six months.

The prosecution came as a result of Operation Blade, which saw joint working between the Environment Agency and Lancashire Police to investigate and tackle illegal waste activity across the county. The Environment Agency has the power to seize assets under the pro­ceeds of crime legislation, and worked closely with the police and Crown Prosecution Ser­vice to ensure the legislation was used to maximum effect.

A site visit to Ridge Farm, Lancaster, carried out as part of the operation, found hundreds of vehicles being held on site in various states of disrepair. The site was not set up to handle the hazardous wastes and liquids which come from vehicles. There were no sealed drainage system and vehicle parts were not stored on a suitably impermeable surface. As such, the site could cause significant harm to the environment.

Liz O’Neil, Area Manager for the Environment Agency said: “We have the legal powers through the Proceeds of Crime Act to seize property and assets where it is proved that these environmental criminals benefited from their actions. “We have dedicated environmental crime teams within the Environment Agency and have worked closely with Lancashire Police to bring these criminals to justice. “This enables us to fulfil our role to protect and improve the environment and ensure that illegal waste sites do not have an unfair and detrimental impact on legitimate business and local communities.”

Sgt Fraser Earnshaw, Lancashire Police, said: “This is a very satisfying result for a multi-agen­cy operation, that involved the Environment Agency, the police and our financial investiga­tors and support units, along with other partners such as Health and Safety and the local council.  This result goes to prove that partner agencies will work together to relentlessly pursue those who are involved in organised crime so that we can bring them before the courts and obtain justice.”

Robert Smith, Crown Advocate for the Crown Prosecution Service in Lancashire said: “This was a deliberate attempt by David Peters and Tracey Noble to operate a scrap metal busi­ness illegally so that they could make as much money as possible in a short space of time without having to keep to the regulations that apply to the waste management industry. As well as prosecuting them for this illegal operation, by charging them under the Proceeds of Crime Act, we are ensuring that they can’t keep hold of the money they amassed in this way.”

 

Care home owners fined £10,000 for sewage offence

The Environment Agency has prosecuted the owners of a West Sussex care home for caus­ing sewage to be illegally discharged into a tributary of the River Arun.

Mr Shafik Sachedina and Mr Shiraz Boghani, who run the Clemsford House Care Home at Broadbridge Heath, near Horsham, appeared at Crawley Magistrates Court on Monday 14 June 2010. Both men pleaded guilty to the offence and were each fined £5,000 and both ordered to pay costs of £537.50 in addition to £15 each in victim surcharge.  The Court heard that Clemsford House has a consent that allows carefully monitored dis­charges from the sewage treatment works at the care home to a tributary of the River Arun which should not exceed the level of 25mg/l of Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) and 45mg/l of suspended solids.

On 12 February 2010, an Environment Agency officer visited the care home to undertake routine sampling of the sewage treatment works that serves the property. When analysed the sample showed that the BOD level was 122mg/l, almost five times the permitted figure, and the suspended solids level was 70.2mg/l.

Also taken into consideration by the Court was a further offence that took place in Octo­ber 2008. On this occasion the BOD level was 44.2mg/l and the suspended solids level was 337mg/l – over seven times the allowed limit.

Commenting on the case, Jackie Yeates of the Environment Agency said: “Mr Sachedina and Mr Boghani were both responsible for ensuring that their sewage discharge complied with the strict conditions that we put in place to protect the local environment. Despite this, two serious discharges of sewage occurred from their property and also the possibility of harm to an environmentally sensitive watercourse.”

In mitigation, Mr Sachedina and Mr Boghani apologised for the incidents and have spent nearly £180,000 in providing a new sewage treatment plant for the care home. The installa­tion of the new plant began in April this year and the facility is now operational.

 

Southern Water pay for River Arun sewage pollution

The Environment Agency has prosecuted Southern Water for allowing sewage to enter a tributary of the River Arun at Rustington in West Sussex during September last year.

Southern Water Services Ltd appeared at Chichester Magistrates Court on Friday 11 June and pleaded guilty to the offence. The water company was fined £5,000 and ordered to pay costs totalling £1,414.

The Court heard that on 3 September 2009, the Environment Agency received a call from Arun District Council saying that there was sewage in a stream at the business park on the A259 Rustington bypass. On arrival at the stream, which flows into the Black Ditch and then travels to the River Arun, Environment Agency officers found the watercourse to be very dark and grey and the water smelt strongly of sewage.

Sewage leak was then traced to a drain which had a grill across its entrance and waste ma­terial wrapped around it. The adverse effect caused by the pollution could been seen along the stream for 130 metres until it disappeared under a road bridge.

Samples taken of the pollutant showed that the effluent was the strength of raw sewage and readings of ammonia levels were six times the fatal dose for wildlife. During the investi­gation the Environment Agency discovered that a blockage in the main sewer about a half a ilometre away had caused this incident and additional problems had been experienced at the same location in the past.   Monitoring equipment was put in place at the sewer by Southern Water because of four previous blockages at the same location over the past five years, but this had not detected the latest incident.

Commenting on the case, James Humphrys, Environment Agency Area Manager said: “All companies that handle polluting material are expected to take the highest possible care that there is absolutely no risk to the environment. In this case, regrettably sewage caused sig­nificant pollution of the stream which could have been avoided.”

 

Plymouth City Council fined

Plymouth City Council has been ordered to pay £11,742 in fines and costs for selling tv monitors and other potentially harmful electrical waste to unauthorised recyclers

On January 30, 2009 the Agency visited a local recycling business after receiving reports of illegal waste activity. An officer saw a large amount of waste electrical goods including tv monitors and washing machines stored outside in the open. Monitors are classified as haz­ardous waste because of the large amount of potentially-toxic lead present in the cathode ray tube and screen.

Local authorities are required to ensure any waste electrical and electronic goods (WEEE) received at their civic amenity sites are kept safe and only sent to authorised treatment fa­cilities for recycling and disposal. They have a duty to reduce the amount of waste going to landfill and increase recycling.

Councils must ensure the correct paperwork is completed when waste is transferred to a third party for recycling. This is done through transfer notes. The completion of transfer notes is a statutory requirement.

The site operator confirmed the electrical waste seen at his premises had come from Chel­son Meadow Civic Amenity site. When asked for a transfer note the man said, ‘What’s a transfer note?’

When the officer visited Chelson Meadow he was told two other firms had removed hazard­ous wastes from the site without transfer notes. Neither company was authorised to take waste and store it at their premises.

Further checks revealed waste electrical goods including old tv’s had been illegally removed from another of the City Council’s civic amenity sites at Weston Mill.

Some of the waste was then sold on to a third party allegedly involved in the illegal export of waste. The Environment Agency is currently investigating illegal shipments of hazardous waste to Ghana. It is illegal to export electrical items which are beyond repair.

The court heard that televisions or washing machines sent to Africa may have been burnt for valuable materials inside, posing a health risk to workers and harming the environment.

‘There were serious management failures at both these civic amenity sites as a result of negligence on the part of the council. Potentially hazardous electrical and electronic waste should have only been transferred to properly authorised waste contractors and this wasn’t happening. The purpose of the WEEE Regulations is to ensure waste is properly recycled in the UK and doesn’t end up in places like Africa,’ said Matthew Lee for the Environment Agency. Plymouth City Council has carried out a thorough review of its procedures and made sure all waste recycling activities are legal and comply with the strictest of conditions.

Plymouth City Council was fined £8,000 and ordered to pay £3,742 costs after pleading guilty to four offences including, as a person who keeps and disposes of controlled waste, failed to ensure transfer notes were completed and signed in accordance with the Environ­mental Protection Act 1990. The offences were committed between April 1, 2008 and June 2, 2009.

 

Worker deaths in Britain fall to record low

New figures released on 30 June reveal that the number of people killed at work in Britain fell last year to a record low.

The HSE has released the provisional data, which shows that 151 workers were killed be­tween 1 April 2009 and 31 March 2010 compared to 178 deaths in the previous year and an average number over the last 5 years of 220 deaths per year.

Judith Hackitt, the HSE Chair said:

“It’s really very encouraging to see a further reduction in workplace fatalities in the past year. This is performance which owes much to good practice, leadership and employee engagement. No doubt the recession has resulted in lower levels of activity in some sectors and a decrease in the numbers of new inexperienced recruits has also contributed to this fall in fatalities.

“We should also remember that 151 families are mourning the loss of someone who last year went out to work and never came home. Being one of the best health and safety per­formers in the world means continuing to strive to drive these numbers down further - not getting complacent about what we’ve collectively achieved and recognising the new chal­lenges as we emerge from the recession.

“As with all health and safety statistics, today’s announcement is a combination of encour­aging news about improvement but also a salutary reminder of the tragedies of lives lost at work.”

Despite the overall improvement, agriculture, the most dangerous industry in Britain, has recorded a sizeable increase in deaths. 38 workers died on farms in the last year, marking a disappointing return to levels of earlier years after a record low of 25 deaths in 2008/09.

Judith Hackitt added:

“We are especially concerned to see the continuing high levels of fatalities in agriculture.  The fact that many of these lives have been lost in family businesses is a double tragedy. Not only have families been ripped apart, but businesses that have been handed down through generations have been ruined. No industry can or should regard high levels of workplace death and injury as being ‘part of the job’. It doesn’t have to be this way as many other sec­tors have shown by their improvement.”

Large falls have been recorded in some of the other historically most dangerous industries in Britain:

•          41 fatal injuries to construction workers were recorded - a rate of 2.0 deaths per 100,000 workers, compared to an average of 66 deaths in the past five years and a fall from the 52 deaths (and rate of 2.4) recorded in 2008/09.
•          42 fatal injuries to services workers were recorded, a rate of 0.2 deaths per 100,000, com­pared to an average of 72 deaths in the past five years and a fall from the 62 deaths (and rate of 0.3) recorded in 2008/09.
•          24 fatal injuries to manufacturing workers were recorded, a rate of 0.9 deaths per 100,000, compared to an average of 38 deaths in the past five years and a fall from 33 deaths (and rate of 1.1) in 2008/09.

Judith Hackitt said: “We need the agriculture industry to recognise that it can address the problem and learn the lessons from these sectors. Improvements can be achieved even in any industry sector with leadership and by focusing on the priority issues.”

The new figures show that compared with the latest data available for the four other lead­ing industrial nations in Europe - Germany, France, Spain and Italy - Great Britain has, for more than the last six years, had the lowest rate of fatal injuries.

Ed -

The average rate of fatal injury over the last five years has been 0.7 per 100, 000 workers

In each of the last five years, the number of fatal injuries has been:

2008/09 - 178 workers died

2007/08 - 233 workers died

2006/07 - 247workers died

2005/06 - 217 workers died

2004/05 - 223 workers died.

The figures for 2009/10 are provisional. They will be finalised in June 2011 following any necessary adjustments arising from investigations, in which new facts can emerge about whether the accident was work-related. The delay of a year in finalising the figures allows for such matters to be fully resolved in the light of formal interviews with all relevant wit­nesses, forensic investigation and coroners’ rulings.

 

Final set of 2009 pesticide residue figures

The Pesticide Residues Committee (PRC) has published its final quarterly report for food samples collected in 2009.

The report found that the majority of foods had no detectable residues and those that did contain pesticides were not likely to be harmful to health. Tests found that 781 out of 1415 samples of 28 different foods tested had no detectable residues. Also, 626 samples con­tained levels below the maximum residue level (MRL) - the legally permitted amount.

Chairman of the committee Dr Ian Brown said: “The majority of food sampled either does not contain detectable residues, or where residues are found, they are in accordance with legal limits. The committee has looked carefully at all of the residues above the MRL and we are satisfied that all the results are unlikely to be of concern for consumer health.

“The results show 8 samples (0.6% of samples covered by the report) contained residues above the legal levels. We have looked carefully at the findings and concluded that in all cases the residues found were unlikely to have resulted in any health effects for consumers.  These results should reassure consumers that the food they eat continues to be safe. I can understand that some people have concerns about pesticide residues in their food, but as a doctor I cannot over-emphasise the importance of continuing to eat at least five portions of fruit and vegetables a day. Scientific evidence shows that the health benefits far outweigh any concerns about pesticide residues.”

 

Health and safety ‘used as an excuse’, Judith Hackitt warns

Too many people use health and safety as an excuse to hide behind, the Chair of the Health and Safety Executive has warned.

Judith Hackitt made the comments in a letter to Lord Young of Graffham, welcoming his review and offering to help gather evidence for his inquiry.

Prime Minister David Cameron appointed Lord Young to lead a Whitehall-wide review of health and safety law and practice. He will also examine compensation culture and report to the Prime Minister in the summer.

In her letter, Judith Hackitt wrote:

“The terms of reference of your review extend beyond HSE’s remit, which is concerned with addressing real risks and preventing death, injury and ill health to those at work and those affected by work related activities. However, we in HSE have been saying for some time that health and safety is being used by too many as a convenient excuse to hide behind.  We welcome your review and stand ready to make available to you whatever information or insight we can.”

The HSE has been running its myth of the month campaign since 2007, hitting back at some of the ridiculous decisions that are wrongly blamed on health and safety – which we at BRN are pleased to carry – Ed.

 

European safe maintenance drive launches in Britain

Maintenance is integral to running a safe and reliable operation. Good planning and having the right skills and tools to do the job minimises the risk to workers and the public in any task from repairing a gas main to fixing a roof.

That’s the message behind a new European initiative launched in Britain.

It is estimated that between 25 and 30 per cent of all manufacturing industry deaths in Britain result from maintenance activity, with common causes of fatalities and major injuries including falls from height and failure to properly isolate machinery so that it restarts while being worked on.

Many of these incidents are entirely preventable, and the initiative aims to raise awareness among businesses and their workers and to help them implement simple solutions.

The European Healthy Workplaces Campaign on Safe Maintenance 2010-2011 is coordi­nated by the European Agency for Safety and Health at Work (EU-OSHA), and is being taken forward in Britain by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) along with organisations repre­senting employers, workers and other interested bodies, including the Trades Union Con­gress (TUC) and EEF The Manufacturers’ Organisation.

The British drive includes a new ‘one stop shop’ safe maintenance section of the HSE web­site. It features a quick and easy checklist to assess how good current maintenance practices are and offers pointers on how to improve. Free downloadable fact sheets, posters, and information on how organisations can get involved, are also available.

HSE Chair Judith Hackitt delivered the keynote speech at a launch event in London, attended by organisations including Jaguar Land Rover, The British Plastics Federation (BPF) and The Ladder Association, as well as trade unions. Delegates were given a checklist to plan how their organisations could get involved in the initiative to raise awareness and protect their workers.

Judith Hackitt said:

“Maintenance work is often seen simply as a disruption to normal service, but it is funda­mental to the integrity of every system and to the health and safety of workers and the public.  Workers are often under pressure to complete jobs quickly, but there is no excuse for put­ting themselves and others in danger by taking short cuts.  All organisations, irrespective of their size and purpose, need to take the opportunity to look at how they plan and manage maintenance to see if improvements could be made. With planning and the right skills it can be done efficiently and will lead to increased produc­tion and better service delivery.”

Lynn Edwards, Chair, BPF Health & Safety Committee, said:

“Even though every business is legally obliged to ensure the health and safety of its employ­ees and persons who come in to contact with their trade, it is easy to forget how intrinsic maintenance operations are to occupational safety and health.

“It is evident that the smallest failure can have drastic consequences; I see this campaign as a wake-up call to those businesses that look upon maintenance as a quick fix to getting their product out of the door.

“For those companies that realised and have benefited from an integrated management approach then this campaign will help solidify all of the hard work that they have done. We at the British Plastics Federation will continue to support and promote the campaign on Safe Maintenance.”

 

New guidance to help prevent waste bin deaths

New guidance is now available for those who produce and collect commercial waste, in a bid to prevent people who shelter in bins being killed or injured.

It follows the deaths of three people since May 2009 who were found dead at waste depots when waste was unloaded from the collection vehicles.

Anecdotal reports from the waste management and recycling industry suggest that there have been many other occasions where people have been discovered alive in bins prior to, or during, them being emptied into collection vehicles.

The guidance has been developed in response to calls from industry for clearer ways of working and has been produced by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) in conjunction with the Waste Industry Safety and Health (WISH) Forum (see notes to editors).

It is aimed at waste producers, those responsible for managing waste storage areas, and waste collection organisations who all have responsibilities under Section 3 of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 and the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regula­tions 1999 to reduce the potential for injury and death to people in bins.

The guidance outlines simple, sensible steps that businesses should be taking as part of their normal work, and if it is followed, organisations should be doing enough to meet their legal duties.

The guidance includes advice on risk assessments, the checking of bins, actions to take on discovering a person and examples of good practice within the industry, such as recognising high-risk locations and ensuring employees are properly briefed and trained, to help compa­nies understand what they need to do.

Geoff Cox, HSE’s Head of Waste Management and Recycling Sector, said:

“These deaths and near misses most often involve those who are vulnerable either through drink or through seeking shelter. But they are preventable.

“Those who produce the waste, are responsible for storing it or collecting it all have an es­sential role to play in reducing the likelihood of any further tragic deaths.

“The industry has been after guidance to clarify ways of working and what we have pro­duced with WISH is simple, relevant and user-friendly.

“We fully recognise that seeking shelter in a bin may be preferable to risking it on the street in all weathers, but we want people to understand what the tragic consequences of that can be. We encourage those who are sleeping rough to look after themselves and to look out for each other too.”