Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Peter McMurray Hi
Just would like to clarify something off you guys in the know.
Do properties undergoing 'Localised T3 asbestos surveys' need to be unoccupied if there is no contractor on site in case of an emergency (disturbing asbestos). The localisation of the intrusive work generally is minor, but still...you just never know!
Replies appreciated
Many thanks
Peter
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By David G C not sure whether i fully understand your thread but rule of thumb - competent asbestos surveyors should ensure that access to areas/rooms to be surveyed and materials sampled are restricted only to those carrying out the survey, display suitable signs etc "Do not enter asbestos survey in progress" if suspect ACMs be discovered and renders the ACM to a condition in which the asbestos is no longer bound to its matrix - however minor -appropriate arrangements can be made to make the area safe. something a competent asbestos survey team would be able to do.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Granville Jenkins Type 3 surveys are known as 'destructive surveys' and I mean 'destructive' in the full sense, this type of survey is carried out where there is an intention to either carry out a major refurbishment or demolition works and there is a need to identify any areas where asbestos may be present (even areas that are not necessarily accessible - hence destructive.
Type 2 Surveys are what I would call intrusive in that samples are taken for analysis to confirm whether or not the material contains asbestos. No major damage is caused but representative samples are taken throughout each room of a building and at worst minor remedial works may be necessary, the samples are small and the damage may not be clearly visible.
Type 1 surveys are non-intrusive and basically consists of a walk round and a note made on the likelihood of the material containing asbestos - it is unlikely that a type 1 survey meets the requirements of the 2006 Asbestos Regulations which require an 'investigation' to be carried out. Also from a personal point of view and it is my personal opinion, type 1 surveys are not worth the paper they are written because no material assessment will have been carried out to identify whether or not any of the material contains asbestos, so you are back where you started - without an adequate record.
I was responsible for setting up asbestos registers for all of my employers London premises, after reading various documents, including the Asbestos at Work Regulations and HSG227 (A comprehensive guide to managing asbestos in premises) I plumped for a type 2 survey. The end result is that there is now a detailed asbestos register for each site (which is now in the process of being updated, the registers contain material assessments for each sample (regardless of whether or not asbestos was identified) which is followed by a priority assessment (for more information on what is required of an asbestos register please read HSG227).
There is now a very detailed asbestos register for all London sites, and when the Registers have been updated it is proposed to put the registers on the companies intranet for open access.
There is quite a significant cost associated with such a detailed survey, however, I have occasion to refer to the asbestos registers, contractors proposing to carry out work at the premises make reference to the registers, and staff raise queries from time to time with respect to suspect materials, as an example just yesterday I received a call from a concerned member of staff, I went to the asbestos register and within minutes I was able to confirm that the material had been sampled and was found not to contain any asbestos material. The acid test - was it worth the money in carrying out a type 2 survey? Yes! Yes! Yes!
I assume you meant a type 2 survey rather than the more drastic type 3 as you specifically mention 'localised'.
Regards Granville
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Granville Jenkins I seem to have got a bit distracted in my earlier response, and would like to mention that in the interests of health and safety you should not be taking samples in occupied offices/premises where people may be inadvertently exposed to asbestos.
If you are having a type 2 survey carried out, only small samples will be taken but it would still be prudent to carry out such activities in public/staff areas outside of normal working hours when the building/office is mostly unoccupied.
In the surveys that I was responsible for managing no samples were taken in occupied offices and around 60% of the sampling was carried out outside of normal working hours, the only exceptions were plant rooms and remote external elements of the premises.
Regards Granville
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Adrian Watson Granville,
One point; there is No Difference between a type 1 and type 2 survey other than that you take samples during a type 2 survey. Both are intrusive.
Regards Adrian
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Adrian Watson Peter,
Yes areas do need to be unoccupied for a localised type 3 survey.
Regards Adrian
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By S R Robinson I agree with the above. Access should be restircted to any areas where the surveyor is carrying out works until he has finished. No sampling can take place when others are present.
If this causes too much disruption to staff/tennats then carry out the work out of hours. This is more likely during a type 3 when breaking through walls as not only must the room the surveyor is working in have access restricted but the area he could break through to must be unoccupied too.
Further to a comment above, the survey does not have to be destructive. It is possible to carry out a type 3 survey without using a sledge hammer and repair walls, floors etc afterwards. (Another reason to carry out this sort of survey out of hours... it allows the glue / plaster / paint to dry).
As a final point, ensure that the report states that a type 3 survey (even localised) was carried out, not an intrusive type 2 or a type 2+. This will cover you in the event of an HSE visit, audit or if something goes wrong.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Peter McMurray Thankyou for the respones!
It has cleared up the area I was a bit vague on.
As I understand it now, the property can be occupied but the area where potential sampling may be carried out cannot.
Thanks again
Peter
|
|
|
|
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.