There was a thread on this same subject only a couple of weeks or so ago. The general consensus if I remember correctly was that a TBT is sufficient as long are there are no changes to the work methods/ equipment and those operatives would be classified as low risk ie essentially coming into contact with non-licensed ACMs. Alternatively you could give them a short training session annually based on topics identified in reg 10 of CAR.

The broad scope allowed in the context of Reg 10 for "awareness" refresher shouldn't be confused with the necessarily more rigorous & practical refresher requirements for non-licensed task competencies.

UKATA have recently clarified their stance on "Awareness" refresher renewals.
If your operatives have in-date certificates for non-licensed competency then the requirement for certificated general "awareness" training is surely essentially redundant?

Not knowing the current position of the various training bodies, I can only suggest that a refresh period of 3 years for formal training would be generally applicable for the non-licensed task people?

You are obviously bound by client requirments here, but I wonder if your client is entirely up-to-date with the current UKATA stance, or is aware that annual UKATA 'refresh' of awareness training simply isn't necessary or indeed advisable?

UKATA are no doubt ensuring that their organisation will carry out as much training as they can. By closing the door to other training providers, no doubt. On the surface I for one do not have a problem with this as, working for a licence holder we are a UKATA member. It is time that 'rogue' training providers were jettisoned anyway. This, however, is of no comfort to an organisation who might only ever need Category A (awareness) training and don't want to use UKATA. And have no aspirations to become a member. CAR 2006 will not specify particular trainers, that's not to say that if you can demonstrate competency and dilligence then you might, just might still be compliant. You have probably read the links but I've attached them anyway. Perception and interpretation spring to mind though...

http://www.ukata.org.uk/...r%20Training%20-%203.pdf

http://www.ukata.org.uk/...-%20accepted%203_6_11%20(amended%206.pdf

Zoltangera
You have said your staff have received UKATA Asbestos Awareness Training - that is precisely what it is Asbestos Awareness. It is important to understand that this Asbestos Awareness Training does not permit or qualify persons to undertake any form work with or on asbestos.
If your staff are working on non licensed materials they should under go at least Category B training.

We seem to be confusing 2 levels of training here

Training to undertake non licensed work

and

Asbestos Awareness

These two are totally separate and I agree with UKATA that for non licensed work properly set up UKATA or equivalent cours must be followed. For the latter it would be wrong for UKATA to assert their view that they alone can undertake such refresher training. My only caveat here is to be certain that you are competent, in terms of regulation 10, to undertake such training.

As far as CAR 2006 amendments are concerned I think that it may well be that UKATA trainers are holding back until the new category of notifiable non licensed work becomes more defined. It will I understand almost certainly affect many who are currently using the sporadic and low level definition to avoid the use of licensed contractors.

Do rember however that the reason you are using UKATA no licensed training is because a client has required it and you should have tendered sufficient monies to undertake this training. If you have not got such money I think you need to talk to yopur manager and the tendering people in your organisation.

Bob