|
        
|
|
HAV Conference 2006: Practical solutions EHN’s HAV Conference 2006 showed how hirers, contractors and suppliers are working in partnership to tackle the issue effectively. Alan Guthrie reports. The Conference, which was held on 12 October at the Ricoh Arena in Coventry, was attended by more than 300 people comprising hirers, contractors and equipment suppliers. All were eager to learn about the latest developments in the management of HAV and compliance with the Control of Vibration at Work Regulations, introduced last year. Following on from EHN’s 2005 Conference, the event shifted emphasis from the theory behind merely measuring vibration, to the practical solutions that are being established. Brian Coles, Noise & Vibration Consultant with the Health & Safety Executive (HSE), described the main developments that had taken place. He explained how a need had been identified 12 months ago for risk management information that was simple to follow, consistent, reliable and realistic. The aim was to help users make the best choices regarding equipment and techniques. “Since then, the most important underpinning factor is that we have all been working together,” he stated. “A Construction Industry HAV Working Group was formed in January. A protocol for presenting HAV data has been agreed and plans for a new public database for the collected data has been agreed in principle. I understand that it is hoped that this will be available during the first half of next year.” He added that HSE had introduced projects to promote good risk management practice, equipment supply chain practice and worker involvement in risk management. A new website (www.hse.gov.uk/vibration/hav) had been established as a source of information and examples of good practice that could be disseminated throughout industry. “I hear that manufacturers increasingly talk to their customers about HAV. Communication is good. It helps us all to understand each other’s positions and to work out how best we can each contribute to solving the problem. “Hirers have responded magnificently” “Hire companies have responded magnificently to the challenge. Some have done tremendous work on explaining HAV and in training staff to give good advice. Hirers’ professional service helps British industry to be more efficient and safer. They are powerful partners for HSE in delivering a safer workplace.” Brian Coles said that several industry bodies had made significant contributions, such as the HAVTEC tool vibration database from OPERC (Off-highway Plant and Equipment Research Centre), the British Tunnelling Society’s Code of Practice, and Construction Industry Council guidance. He said that there had been considerable progress regarding European standards. CENELEC standards for electrical power tools had been modified to give tri-axial measurements of vibration emissions for both hands, and a CEN/ISO work programme was in place to modify vibration test codes for pneumatic tools. Future plans included the possible resolution of the ‘traffic light’ vibration database by the Construction Industry HAV Working Group. HSE also plans to visit equipment manufacturers between now and spring 2007 to discuss further methods for HAV reduction. Balfour Beatty’s HAV strategy Mike Peasland, Group Managing Director of Balfour Beatty, described his company’s HAV strategy and practical solutions it had developed. Balfour Beatty’s Building, Building Management and Services Division, for which Mike Peasland has responsibility, comprises the five businesses of Haden Young, Balfour Beatty Construction Scottish & Southern, Balfour Beatty Construction Northern, Mansell and Balfour Kirkpatrick. Together they employ 4,619 staff, 2,807 operatives and use an average of more than 10,000 personnel from specialist contractors. In explaining the accepted theory behind improving safety performance, he emphasised the importance of introducing engineering and hardware improvements, adequate systems of safety management and procedures, and recognising the human factors of people and their behaviour. “However, what is often missing from the ‘jigsaw’ is the need to design for safety. No matter what the corporate culture, people can make mistakes and it is important to examine issues such as design systems and work methods, so that if risk cannot be eliminated, it can be reduced. At Balfour Beatty, all managers at all levels have to demonstrate that our corporate safety policy is being implemented, showing visible leadership." The company’s HAV strategy, devised several years before the CVWR’s introduction, was based on a spirit of partnership between suppliers, hirers, health surveillance partners and the workforce. “Statistics suggest that, nationwide, there are 5 million users of hand-held and hand-guided tools, with 1 million exposed to dangerously high levels of HAV, and 300,000 suffering from the advanced stages of vibration white finger. However, we regarded this as an opportunity rather than a problem. It was an opportunity to engage with our workforce with an on-going commitment to their welfare.” Hilti was chosen as the major supplier partner owing to the manufacturer’s extensive experience in addressing HAV and developing solutions, said Mike Peasland. Central to the management strategy was the availability of in-use tool vibration data, training and health surveillance. “Risk assessment involved designing out risk where possible, using alternate methods where appropriate and engineering out problems. There are an increasing number of mechanical systems and equipment that can replace manual processes, such as mechanical pile breaking, pile rebar debonding systems, hydro jetting and cutting, and attachments for mechanical plant.” Balfour Beatty had reviewed 18,000 tools from 30 suppliers and assessed low-vibration tools and best-suited inserts. On-site tests of equipment were implemented to ensure that no worker would be exposed to vibration levels above the Exposure Action Value (EAV) of 2.5m/s2 in an eight-hour working day. Eventually three preferred hirers were selected for their compliance with these criteria, including Speedy, Hewden and GAP. Training on HAV was implemented for staff at all levels, and a programme of on-going health surveillance was introduced so that workers could be monitored and protected. “Safety is not about statistics, but is the most visible manifestation of quality,” contended Mike Peasland. “Superior safety performance drives long-term value, and whereas price is what you pay, quality and value is what the customer receives.” Speedy’s forthright challenge Steve Corcoran, Chief Executive Officer of Speedy Hire, whose forthright challenge to manufacturers to submit tools to real-life testing to the ISO 5349 standard was one of the strongest messages at last year’s Conference, explained measures that his company had taken in the subsequent 12 months. “We have been assisting our customers to address the HAV issue. It is an opportunity for hirers, manufacturers and contractors to act together. Collectively we can raise awareness and effect change. Twelve months ago, Speedy committed itself to independent tool testing, and it was great to hear a similar endorsement from Mike Peasland. Independent testing is a means of delivering consistent data, and manufacturers should welcome it as a way of proving product quality. We ruffled a few feathers amongst some contractors, but we need them to be consistent in their requests for independent testing so that hirers can enter into meaningful dialogue with manufacturers. They also need to ensure that a consistent message of HAV management is implemented at all levels of their organisations. “Our customers outsource to us the provision of quality products that help meet their safety obligations. Hirers must invest in the right products to support this. We advised all our suppliers of our commitment to HAV management and the provision of appropriate data,” he said. “We have reviewed all products we operate, amounting to 4,000 lines. We are committed to make this happen and to independent testing.” Committed to independent testing Part of Speedy’s initiative has been the appointment of a Group Supply Chain Director, Paul Green, who also spoke at the Conference. “Health & Safety is at the top of Speedy’s agenda,” he said. “A year ago we committed to supporting the Major Contractors Group’s decision to use tools tested under real-life conditions, and we have honoured that. We support OPERC’s HAVTEC database which makes test data freely available. And any supplier which wants its products considered for our fleet has to be similarly committed to independent testing. “Our commitment is to provide to our customer what we believe is the best possible solution. However, this pursuit of excellence must always be on-going, and we must avoid complacency at all costs. Our business model is based on whole-life costing, taking account of price, maintenance costs, spares, warranty and eventual disposal, and we are developing true partnerships with our suppliers. We must all work together.” When he spoke at last year’s Conference, Stewart McNaughton, the Quality, Health & Safety Manager with the Scottish hire group,Martin Plant Hire, highlighted difficulties with the ‘traffic light’ system of presenting HAV data. Exposure values did not fit neatly into their green, amber or red colour zones, making it impossible to create an at-a-glance guide to tool selection. In addition, some available data was in single-axis, rather than tri-axial, format that could unfairly penalise manufacturers adopting real-life testing. “We asked for standardised testing with published data being subject to audit. Martin Plant Hire is committed to providing information that is clear, accurate and honest, protecting end-users from litigation, customers from risk and our company from prosecution. “We
took
a
stance
based
on
principle,
not
revenue,
which
was
not
always
popular.
We
lost
some
customers
who
were
confused
by
our
decision
not
to
use
the
traffic
light
system,
but
we
prepared
a
dossier
of
information
explaining
our
position,
the
nature
of
the
problem
and
possible
solutions.
In
this
way,
we
are
informing,
educating
and
gaining
customers.
We
are
also
evaluating
new
Stewart McNaughton ended with a warning that solicitors were showing greater interest in pursuing HAV-related compensation claims. This was another reason why the HAV issue should continue to be discussed so that a consensus view could be reached in a spirit of inclusiveness. “If we do not work together, we will work against each other,” he said. Practical approaches Emphasising the shift from theory to practice at this year’s Conference, Tim Ward, HM Principal Specialist Inspector (Noise & Vibration) described practical approaches to managing HAV and the role of hirers. He said that it was naïve to reduce the issue to a question of one tool being ‘better’ than another, but was rather a case of on-going risk reduction. The CVWR established a framework to follow, beginning with risk assessment and the elimination of any risk if possible, or its reduction to as low as reasonably practicable. Managers had to ensure that workers’ exposure remained below permitted levels and that any residual risks were addressed through training and other measures, with health surveillance. “Poor practice includes assuming hand tool use is inevitable and working up to the exposure limits. Effort has to be made to manage the issue. HSE’s HAV Control Campaign 2006-07 aims at ensuring the adoption of good practice HAV control measures and proper management of risks. The programme includes inspection, communications and stakeholder engagement, and target industries include construction." He said that several high exposure activities had been identified, where low or no-risk alternatives existed. These include hand tunnelling, breaking concrete and pile cropping with hand-held breakers, scabbling with needle scalers or hammer/pole scabblers, wall chasing with hand-held breakers, and drilling with hammer drills. Reasonable practicable alternatives to pile cropping included the Elliott method, the Recipieux methods, suspended hydraulic pile croppers and machine mounted breakers. To avoid using hand-held breakers, construction work could be planned to minimise the need for breaking through new concrete and masonry. Alternative work methods could also be used, such as machine mounted hydraulic breakers, floor saws, hydraulic crushers, diamond core drilling and hydro-demolition or UHP water jetting. Similarly, good design could avoid unnecessary drilling. Low-vibration alternatives could also be considered, such as jig-mounted drilling, diamond core drilling and use of direct fastening tools. Tim Ward said that, where such vibration reducing measures were not used, HSE inspectors would seek justification for this. However, it was recognised that using hand-held tools would sometimes be inevitable. “Use of equipment should not be based on ‘how long can we use this tool?’, he said. “The limit value is the level at which harm will start to occur, and is not a target if lower exposure is reasonably practicable. Hirers are major stakeholders in the HAV management process. As suppliers they have legal duties to ensure machinery is safe and to provide information for safe use under the Health & Safety at Work Act. Under the Supply of Machinery (Safety) Regulations they must take reasonable steps in ensuring equipment meets essential Health & Safety requirements.” To explain how smaller contractors and hirers can work together to manage HAV, Simon Higgins, Contracts Manager with Wold Construction of Beverley, spoke in collaboration with Peter and Elaine Houldridge of Hull-based Complete Hire Services (CHS). Peter Houldridge described how the company specialised in providing equipment that addressed Health & Safety issues, including low-vibration tools. Simon Higgins explained that “as a small business, we do not have a dedicated Health & Safety manager. Eighteen months ago, the HSE visited one of our sites as part of its HAV awareness campaign and we knew we had to address the issue before the CVWR came into effect.” Like many contractors, Wold’s workforce uses many hand-held vibrating tools in a typical day and this made HAV assessment and management particularly challenging. “We found that CHS had a vibration management system that utilised a points management system. It was easy to use and required little paperwork. We devised a daily record book for each employee and CHS also organised training on an individual basis.” Addressing obligations Training Manager Elaine Houldridge explained that the HAV management system was developed to suit all sizes of companies regardless of their Health & Safety resources. “All equipment is tagged with a points value for 15 minutes’ usage. A total of 100 denotes exposure equivalent to the Exposure Action Value (EAV), and 400 equates to the Exposure Limit Value (ELV). Details are recorded in the employee’s record book, which shows how the client is addressing its obligations, and also provides a log of exposure that workers can refer to in the future.” The 2006 Conference showed the huge efforts that have been made by organisations from all aspects of the supply chain to implement practical HAV solutions. It also demonstrated the importance of hirers as the key link between suppliers and contractors. There is obviously an on-going interest in HAV reduction and management, and EHN will continue to report on new developments. • Executive Hire News › Archives › November 2006 › HAV Conference 2006 › Practical solutions
|
