Welcome Guest! The IOSH forums are a free resource to both members and non-members. Login or register to use them

Postings made by forum users are personal opinions. IOSH is not responsible for the content or accuracy of any of the information contained in forum postings. Please carefully consider any advice you receive.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Admin  
#1 Posted : 02 September 2003 14:42:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Jerry Sanderson I have been approached by a school who wish to use old railway sleepers to create raised planters but had "heard" that there are "problems" with these. Not being familiar with these things (never watch Ground Force) I have thought of the obvious issues eg.manual handling,splinters,preventing kids climbing on them,securing them in position but was wondering if anyone who had used such items had come across any other issues.One which springs to mind but I don't know enough about is whether the chemicals used to waterproof the sleepers (creosote?) is an issue(does it leach out over time?). Any comments would be greatly appreciated. Regards. Jerry.
Admin  
#2 Posted : 02 September 2003 15:28:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Tracey Thompson Jerry (sorry about the long one!)but.... the one thing that springs to mind for me with this is CCA(Chromated Copper Arsenate) which is commonly used as wood preservative and it would be worth checking on for railway sleepers too.I have pasted some information below which we have sent out to our schools to inform them of the concerns with wooden play equipment in general: CCA is commonly used to treat timbers to preserve them from weather and insect depredation. It's use is sometimes referred to as "tanalising". Since 2001 there has been increasing pressure to ban the use of CCA, as the arsenic in the compound can leach out in rain or damp and after the use of some "deck brightening" products.Exposure to the arsenic has been linked to bladder and lung cancer, although most studies indicate that the risk is extremely low (one estimate is that the increased cancer risk ranges from 2 in a million to 100 in a million). The effect is not immediate and any illness can take decades to develop. It is probable that in June 2004, a European directive will prohibit the use of CCA for certain wood products. These products include decking and other equipment where there is potential for skin contact. You may already have noticed that some DIY chains are advertising their wood as being “safely treated”, although this practice is not being followed by all the major DIY firms. Labelling usually indicates whether or not CCA has been used in wood preparation. Exposure to the arsenic is through hand-to-mouth contact. There is no risk of arsenic poisoning from exposure to CCA. I would stress that the risk of a child developing an illness from exposure to CCA is very low and that there is no cause for alarm. It is unlikely that playground equipment from reputable suppliers has been treated with CCA and it is thought that once treated wood has been in the environment for any length of time the compound is unlikely to be hazardous. However, if you are concerned about possible exposure to CCA there are some simple steps that can be taken to reduce the level of risk even further: · Check with manufacturers whether equipment has been treated with CCA · Ensure that children wash their hands with soap and water after using wooden play equipment that may have been treated with CCA · Discourage children from eating at wooden tables that may have been treated with CCA · If you are planning to install or build wooden equipment for your playgrounds, check with the manufacturers that CCA has not been used in its preparation. Some of the large DIY stores mark their wood as being “safely treated” but check labels to ensure that it is CCA free. · Applying certain penetrating coatings such as oil-based, semi-transparent stains on a regular basis (once a year or every other year depending upon wear and weathering) may reduce the amount of arsenic that comes out of the wood, although this is based on limited evidence. Please be reassured once again that the risk of illness is low and that most playground equipment will not be treated with CCA. If you have any queries about equipment at your school, please contact the manufacturers in the first instance. Hope this helps! Tracey
Admin  
#3 Posted : 02 September 2003 15:54:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Paul Leadbetter Jerry Could there be a biohazard problem? Although the practice is, I think, being phased out, train toilets used to empty on to the track (hence the notice about not flushing the toilet while in a station). Paul
Admin  
#4 Posted : 02 September 2003 16:29:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Sean Fraser Paul, As any reader of Private Eye can confirm, the carriages with direct dump (pardon the pun) systems were due to be phased out by now but as is consistent with the state of our "modern" railway system it is lagging behind and so they are still in operation, along with the slam-door carriages that were meant to have gone by now. Without getting into the politics of the situation, there's a serious side to this. This issue is also being brought up by railway maintenance workers as a source of concern, especially when one considers that human waste is a significant hazard in untreated form. Not just the nasties either - general ill health can result from frequent exposure to untreated waste and although not always life threatening, it can be very unpleasant in terms of symptoms. Add this to the arsenic, then . . . However, while househunting we visited a house where the owner was proudly displaying a huge lounge table that had been converted from an original railway sleeper. The current condition of the person who created it is unknown!
Admin  
#5 Posted : 02 September 2003 17:00:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Jack I think you ought to see: http://www.hse.gov.uk/hthdir/noframes/creosote.htm
Admin  
#6 Posted : 02 September 2003 18:05:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Geoff Burt Just some observations as I have no knowledge of what sleepers were treated with but ... Firstly, have they been treated with creosote? We have some in the garden and they have tar spots which ooze out when it is hot, so could it have been some other oil but non-creosote treatment? Secondly, going by the way creosote evaporates and washes off fences within 3 or 4 years, and wood sleepers are many years older than that, then would sleepers still pose a problem even if they had been treated with creosote. And finally! to ponder on. Is it reasonable to think that sleepers which may have been contaminated with faeces years ago, still carry a significant risk? Bear in mind that they have been subjected to rain, sun, frost, snow and most importantly time. And if they do carry a risk then what risk rating would it be? Well not quite finally - and is there any recorded history of people suffering from disease or from contact with creosote from old sleepers (apart from manual handling? Is there any research that shows the presence of harmful bacteria? Geoff
Admin  
#7 Posted : 02 September 2003 20:57:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By LiamDC Hi, Don't know about the cresote really, but would it have nutralised by now - considering it possibly never got retreated since the day it was installed. I used to work in the Signalling side of railways (as a manufacturer / supplier) so wouldn't know much about the Permenant Way equipment. But if they changed the sleepers every 10-15 years (which to me does not seem like a very long time especially considering some of the equipment still in use on the railways). Then any harmfull stuff may have been washed out by now (more an environmental problem). One way that may help to find out is to see if you can find an MSDS for cresote (or whatever you suspect the preservative is). There might be some interesting information in it. The only draw back is that you possible will not find a MSDS for the type of cresote used when the sleeper was manufactured (Thats if it was indeed cresote). On the second point raised - Biohazard. I actually now work for a company that designs, manufactures, installs and operates Waste Water Treatment Plants - the main bio hazard with human waste is Hepatitus A (not B - unless there are blood produce involve) we recommend (more like insist) that WWTP workers are inocculated with Hep A, Polio and Tetanus. BUT, remember it is timber we are talking about here and we all have chopping boards at home and most of these would be made of wood. From what I remember butchers always use timber (can't remember if it is a special type of wood) because bactieria can't survive in timber for long - or is this an old wives tale (I don't think it is). Anyway again the effluent would possible have wash away by now. Most of the above is from memory and not researched for this post - as I am just trying to give you more points of investigation. Another point I would consider for the railway ties is Weils disease -(again possible washed away). Did you consider taking the Ties to a saw mill and get them planed to reveal fresh faces? this could get rid of the outer layer that was exposed to the agents of concern (unless the timber was pressure treated - but considering the amount of sleepers produced this would possible have been not done due to the time and cost involved). Hope some of this helps and remember they are only from my initial impression of the problem - if it was me I would research and confirm most of the above.
Admin  
#8 Posted : 03 September 2003 08:42:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Jack In this case there is no point pontificating about what the sleepers contain (they are impregnated with creosote which also contains naphthalene) or whether it had been 'neutralised' or whatever. It's supply for the purpose Jerry is asking about is BANNED! The Creosote (Prohibition on Use and Marketing) Regulations 2003 include the following: 6. Treated wood in respect of which regulation 4(2) or regulation 7 applies may not be used - (a) inside any building; (b) in toys; (c) in playgrounds; (d) in parks, gardens and outdoor recreational and leisure facilities where there is a risk of frequent skin contact; (e) in the manufacture of garden furniture (such as picnic tables); or (f) for the manufacture and use and any retreatment of - (i) containers intended for growing purposes; (ii) packaging which may come into contact with raw materials, intermediate or finished products intended for human or animal consumption; or (iii) any other materials which may contaminate the products mentioned in this sub-paragraph
Admin  
#9 Posted : 03 September 2003 09:07:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Paul Leadbetter Jack But reg 7 says 'Wood that has been treated with a dangerous substance or preparation before these Regulations come into force may be supplied thereafter for second-hand use'. Paul
Admin  
#10 Posted : 03 September 2003 09:12:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Paul Leadbetter Sorry, Jack I have just read The Creosote (Prohibition on Use and Marketing)(No. 2) Regulations 2003 which clarifies the position. Even secondhand, treated wood cannot be used for the purposes which you quoted. Paul
Admin  
#11 Posted : 03 September 2003 09:14:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Geoff Burt You seem to have missed the point of the question Jack. The sleepers are in use now and the query refers to the current risks. We all know creosote is now banned - although there are exceptions. So - bearing in mind the last two contributions what are the current risks? Are they significant? Geoff
Admin  
#12 Posted : 03 September 2003 09:16:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Geoff Burt Whoops, sorry Jack (I should have known better!)
Admin  
#13 Posted : 03 September 2003 09:24:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Robert K Lewis I think the regs were intended to prohibit timber that had been re-treated before supply into the second hand market. I personally have never known sleepers be retreated before horticultural/landscape usage and this is now the only real market for what is a reducing supply availabilty - there are only a limited number out there after all. Deep in my recesses I seem to remember these were pitch pine rather than impregnated timber although there may have been some surface treatment. Certainly there is not likely to be CCA in the material. If they relied on preservatives they would rot within 10 years of installation - I have heard of some which are 100+ years old and still reasonable condition. I would talk to your landscaper and ascertain that there has been no recent treatment and if not then go ahead. Much better to do this than to use precious resources in the shape of concrete/brick/ballast.
Admin  
#14 Posted : 03 September 2003 10:24:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Jerry Sanderson Thanks to everyone who has responded so far.I didn't think this would cause so much discussion.As always the responses are helpful and informative.I will now attempt to collate them into some guidance to the school concerned.
Admin  
#15 Posted : 03 September 2003 13:44:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By peter gotch re the biohazards Some research has indicated that sewage workers can become infected with microorganisms but that any fever soon goes away, so that the risks are low. In many areas eg primary treatment, the main control used is to attempt to work upwind in so far as practical. Think the concerns which have (rightly) been raised by track workers are probably overstated. In terms of your recycling it seems to me that any bio risk should be negligible. Regards, Peter
Admin  
#16 Posted : 03 September 2003 19:04:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Jack I think it's my turn to apologise now. I was probably too dogmatic. The website below ( a company which sells the things) has some quite useful background: http://www.railwaysleepe...sleeper%20treatments.htm My initial response should have made it clear it only applied to creosote treated sleepers (obviously!). The website is useful on types etc. However, as these are intended for use in a school my advice would still be the same. The above website says: Clearly creosote treated sleepers should now not be sold to schools, play areas and public places, where there might be 'frequent skin contact with creosote' but at the same time it is green light as usual for professional and industrial uses, which include: agricultural, railway, forestry, fencing, harbours and waterways and electric power transmission and telecommunications - -
Admin  
#17 Posted : 03 September 2003 22:30:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By George Wedgwood Interesting thread and one I have come across both at home and profesionally in the last two months! Firstly, a landscape gardener would not allow his company to supply old sleepers to me and only new ones (at £28 each and untreated canadian redwood) could be used for garden projects! Well, I could buy used ones from 'a man' for around £10 - 12 but no longer legally as I was told they were banned from sale to "amateurs". After that learning experience, I checked and indeed found all the regs and advice from the HSE, which proved correct. I checked with the rail part of our company and found that they had known about this for a good while and because they were "professionals", they could both use them and sell them to other "professionals"! Never mind the risks from phenols etc. to our employees! We are now putting together guidance for our managers on this but suffice to say after many years of handling slepers both hard and softwood ones, we have no record of an employee having any deleterious effect from contact with creosote! However, I will obey and leave them alone now (they are too heavy anyway!).
Admin  
#18 Posted : 04 September 2003 09:19:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Robert K Lewis I think there is an industry growing here which is calling NEW baulks of timber Railway Sleepers. As far as I know the rail industry has moved to concrete sleepers. There is therefore a degree of re-nomenclature in operation. The timber referred to a sleepers are simply sleeper sized not the actual. The comments all made for treatment will then apply and restrictions need to be followed. Bob
Admin  
#19 Posted : 04 September 2003 21:27:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Geoff Burt Now I'm completely confused - and I blame you Jack! Were the original sleepers treated with creosote? Geoff
Admin  
#20 Posted : 05 September 2003 09:33:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Jerry Sanderson Geoff, In answer to your query I am not certain if the sleepers they intend to use are treated with creosote or not.In my original ignorance I assumed they probably were but thanks to the information provided by colleagues on here it seems I need some further information from the supplier before giving final advice.As they say every day's a school day.
Admin  
#21 Posted : 10 September 2003 17:00:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Alan Barthrope A Very interesting thread. I have not read all the responses so please ignore me if I am repeating a point that has already been discussed. Apart from the rats that run the railway systems there are many that run up and down the tracks depositing all and sundry as they go! As you will therefore expect this can lead to the presence of Leptospirosis bacteria, or Weils disease. I do not know how long this can linger, but all our operatives take special precautions when handling such potentially contaminated materials. Bet this will make Handy Andy & Tommy Walsh think twice about making BBQ tables out of railway sleepers in the future!?
Users browsing this topic
Guest (5)
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.