ASBESTOS REGULATIONS Regulation Application of Division and Regulation Application of Division

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "ASBESTOS REGULATIONS Regulation Application of Division and Regulation Application of Division"

Neil Page
5 years ago
Views:

1 ASBESTOS REGULATIONS Regulation Application of Division and Regulation Application of Division [draft regulation 225 and 240] The duty to identify asbestos and prepare an asbestos register applies to all workplaces in Victoria regardless of the age of the building. Legislative prohibitions on the mining, manufacture, import and use of asbestos have progressively been introduced by States and Territories since the late 1980s, concluding with a national prohibition on the use of all asbestos since 31 December It is proposed to allow a person to assume asbestos is not present if the building, structure, ship or plant was built or made on or after 31 December 2003 and no asbestos has been identified and asbestos is not likely to be present. I cannot agree with the above in relation to assuming no asbestos is present if the building was built post December 31 st There have been many recent discoveries of asbestos containing materials being used on building sites around the country. It has been well publicised in the media and verified that asbestos containing materials and products are still being imported into this country and being used, therefore we cannot assume it is not. Regulations , and Notice of medical practitioner It is proposed to remove the requirement to notify WorkSafe of the name and contact details of registered medical practitioners engaged to undertake medical examinations. Under the OHS Regulations, employers undertaking asbestos removal work are required to provide WorkSafe with the name and contact details of registered medical practitioners engaged to undertake medical examinations. As WorkSafe can obtain the details of these medical practitioners through other channels, the process of the employer providing the details to WorkSafe is no longer required. I believe this to be dumbing down of our legislation. Why would you remove it from legislation, it is important to make this transparent and offer less chance of someone choosing to use a practitioner who has limited knowledge of the consequences of asbestos, the understanding of the job including the wearing of RPE and PPE and the high risk work the asbestos workers are up against. Removal by a Class B licence holder Class B removalists are currently restricted under the DG Order from removing non-friable asbestos that is not fixed or installed, despite being able to remove unlimited amounts of fixed or installed non-friable asbestos. By incorporating the DG Order into the OHS Regulations, and given that the same method of removal and risk control would be used for non-friable asbestos that is not fixed or installed, it is proposed that Class B asbestos removal licence holders be enabled to remove all non-friable

2 asbestos under the OHS Regulations regardless of whether the asbestos is fixed or installed, or not fixed or installed. In relation to the removal of ACD not associated with the removal of non-friable asbestos, it is proposed to incorporate the requirements outlined in DG Order, which are considered to be proportionate to risk. This allows Class B removal of ACD: If the removal of ACD does not exceed 10 minutes in total, and in a cumulative sense does not exceed one hour in seven days, or Where an independent person determines that airborne asbestos fibre levels are likely to be less than one half of the asbestos exposure standard. Asbestos in soils has been known to be a problem and of high risk this is why it has, in the past been a Regulation that it is undertaken by an A Class licensed company. The second dot point here is of real concern: An independent person can make this determination, do they need to air monitor what controls must be in place? Alarm bells are ringing, these jobs can take a very long time to complete, therefore the Unions stance is if it more than a day or 2 of work then a wet decontamination system should be used, (B class are generally not using wet decon) also this will often include the use of an excavator to assist which follows on to the next point of concern; Regulation Persons not to perform asbestos removal work unless licensed [draft regulation 265] It is proposed to allow a Class A licence holder to engage an independent contractor who operates an excavator provided the independent contractor is supervised by the licence holder and the asbestos removal supervisor. Under regulation (1)(b), persons undertaking licensed asbestos removal work must be an employee of a licence holder to perform that asbestos removal work. There are situations where this regulation has made it difficult to undertake certain types of asbestos removal work where the licensed removalist has needed to engage a sub-contractor to assist, such as engaging an excavator operator to assist with the demolition of a building which contains asbestos. The proposed change will enable Class A licence holders to access excavator operator services where necessary from time to time to undertake asbestos removal work. The regulation protects health and safety by ensuring that the independent contractor is appropriately supervised. Any excavator operator assisting in removal of asbestos containing material or dust should be trained. There is no mention of training in the above proposal, this is important, supervision should also be available although the operators need to know the dangers of asbestos and the consequences that can occur and how to correctly fit RPE and the essential steps to decontamination. This training should be undertaken and they should be trained preferably in asbestos removal at least in access to asbestos.

3 Schedule 8 Asbestos Information required to be included in a notification of asbestos removal work [draft schedule Schedule 13] It is proposed to: remove item 12 (details of training and experience of individual employees) and item 13 (date of asbestos register) as this information can be obtained through citing training records and the asbestos control plan include ACD in item 7 (whether the asbestos is friable or non-friable) given incorporation of the DG Order include the number of contractors in item 11 (number of employees) given the proposal to allow independent contractors (excavator operators only) to perform asbestos removal work. require the name of the independent person who determined that airborne asbestos fibre levels are likely to be less than one half of the exposure standard. Dot point 1. Is there a good reason to be removing this information? I think this needs looking at and questioning why?? There are 2 things that have not been addressed that I will add understanding that this may not be the correct forum. 1. There is nowhere in the Victorian Asbestos Regulations or CC which indicates that asbestos removal training must meet a competency standard?? Why is it so, as it is a direction in the National Regulations/COP. 2. A)I have issues personally and have feedback from my students in refresher course that the amount of new B class licenses being issued being of grave concern. I have had B class bosses in my refresher courses who I would consider very incompetent in relation to running an asbestos removal business, on the other hand I have asbestos removal workers who know the Regulations back to front. I do wonder how they ever got a license and if they ever get audited. B)Considering the oversupply of asbestos removalists, and the ebbs and flows of the demo market, there is a lot of underquoting going on. This is concerning, if they underquote there is a very good chance they will cut corners in other areas such as payments to workers and/or poor quality RPE and PPE, disposal and decontamination procedures. FALLS REGULATIONS I have 2 comments here 1. Any work at heights can be high risk. Evidence has shown most hazards occur under 2 metres and many from ladders. Is that not obvious enough to make some changes 2. The definition of passive fall prevention is contradictory when we look at the Regulations and Compliance Code in regards putting a scaffold and an EWP in the same category. This should be looked at. A well-built scaffold is much safer than an EWP which relies on precision when choosing the correct equipment and knowledge and understanding of terrain, controls differences in equipment models etc.

4 Submission number OH0040 OHS Regulations Reform Public comment submission form Submission date 9/9/16 Name Organisation name (where applicable) Postcode 3027 CFMEU Education and Training Unit General comments on the proposed OHS Regulations This comment is in addition to a lengthy response I made in relation to the Asbestos Regulations. Independent person(clarification of what an independent person is and training) The reference to an independent person is easily used for evil rather than good it is to lose a term. These independents need to have training and their knowledge needs to be validated, therefore the CPCCBC5014A - Conduct asbestos assessment associated with removal, which is a requirement under the National Regulations would assist in ensuring they have current knowledge and understanding of this product rather than some mate of Joe Bloggs around the corner, popping onto the job. Education is really essential here in overseeing an asbestos removal job is carried out as per the Regulations. Thank you Specific comments on the proposed OHS Regulations Chapter 1 Preliminary Chapter 2 General duties and issue resolution Chapter 3 Physical hazards Chapter 4 Hazardous substances and materials 1

5 Chapter 5 Hazardous industries Chapter 6 Licensing and Registration Chapter 7 Administrative Matters and Exemptions Chapter 8 Saving and Transitional Provisions Chapter 9 Consequential amendments Schedules 1-19

6 General comments on the proposed EPS Regulations Specific comments on the proposed EPS Regulations Part 1 Preliminary Part 2 Hazard identification Part 3 Duties of designers of Part 4 Duties of manufacturers of Part 5 Duties of importers of Part 6 Duties of suppliers and agents of suppliers of Part 7 Duty of person in charge of Part 8 Notice of design Part 9 Incident Notices Part 10 Saving and transitional provisions Schedule Prescribed equipment designs to be notified

7 General comments on the Regulatory Impact Statement for proposed Occupational Health and Safety Regulations 2017 and Equipment (Public Safety) Regulations 2017 Specific comments on the Regulatory Impact Statement Part One Introduction and general analysis Part Two Analysis by hazard area Part Three Implementation, evaluation and consultation Appendixes A to E Technical Appendix 4

Health and Safety at Work (Asbestos) Regulations 2016

2016/15 Health and Safety at Work (Asbestos) Regulations 2016 Jerry Mateparae, Governor-General Order in Council At Wellington this 15th day of February 2016 Present: His Excellency the Governor-General