Rank: Guest 
|
Posted By Michelle
Has anyone on the forum ever requested an exemption from the WAH05 under regulation 15?
Can't mention to many specifics about the job. Sorry.
I was hoping to find information on how smootly the process went, what condition required it that sort of thing.
Any advice would be gratefully received.
Ta
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Robert K Lewis
Michelle
There is unlikely to be an exemption for a particular company but rather an industry sector or common task across sectors. As you will be aware the recent amendments implement WAH for the Adventure sector, in terms of the at work section, but many had fought hard to get it exempted in total. The parent directive only permits exemptions in exceptional circumstances and I see no reason for this changing.
To all intents and purposes WAH requirements must be met and unless you have a unique sector wide problem there is effectively no prospect of an exemption for your own organisation. Even if industry wide the likelihood is near zero in my view at any rate.
Bob
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Michelle
That is a shame.
My reading of the regs was that a single premises could be exempted, as well as a class of premises.
I'll still pursue it, there's a very good case for a exemption (I think). But it looks like I will also start trying to find an alternative solution.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By ddraigice
It's quite difficult to make a comment without knowing exactly what issues you've got but of course the regs are not set in stone - they do say that if you cant do a you can try to do b and if not - then do c or d - each one a little further down the hierarchy.
As long as you can justify the system of work and its not reasonably practicable to use one higher up the hierarchy then you're OK.
But I assume you mean that it may be a case where no protective measures can be used. I would think this would usually be a big no - usually if a system of work means that you are unable to use any control measures the answer would be to find a new system of work but again, its hard to say without knowing the facts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Michelle
Some specifics.
It's roof access to a drain in the middle of the roof. One side is protected by barrier with in line with schedule 2. The other side is protected by parapet at 850mm high, and over 550mm wide. The parapet cannot be raised any higher due to planning restrictions.
The parapet is more that ten times wider than handrail. I don't see how someone could fall over it.
The drain has to be cleared/checked by a trained and competent person once a year.
It seems to me that the risk is so low there is no need to bring the parapet up to the height required by schedule 2. And therefore would be suitable candidate for exemption.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By andrew morris
Hi,
I would suggest that is is not "exemption" that you are looking for and I would politely suggest you will not get one.
There are lots of options after edge protection that you could consider - personal fall prevention (work positioning systems), collective fall arrest, personal fall arrest.
You don't mention where the access to the roof is and what the dimensions of the roof are - you may be able to ensure that person do not get exposed to a risk if you can ensure that they do not get anywhere near the edge. You could also consider barriers on the roof to keep people away from the edge (these would not have to be 1.1m high and therefore not go against planning) they would just have to prevent people getting to the edge.
Hope this has given you some ideas
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.