Rank: New forum user
|
Has any members noticed a reduction in the burden of completing COSHH risk assessment as a result of the changes to the COSHH regulations 2013?
Grateful for any feedback identifying where time can be be saved as a result of the changes. I see that they have been reduced in content, but the burden remains the same as to employeer / employee duties/
Thank you
Jim Sampson
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
There has been no change to the regulations, but a revised ACoP & Gudance has been published. http://press.hse.gov.uk/...tances-in-the-workplace/Specific revisions from the previous ACOP include: material supporting Regulations 7, 9, 10 and 11 has been updated to take account of legislative changes such as the introduction of the EU Regulations for the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and restriction of Chemicals (REACH) and the Classification, Labelling and Packaging of substances and mixtures (CLP); material has been updated and amended to reflect other ongoing reviews of technical guidance associated with COSHH, e.g. for Local Exhaust Ventilation (LEV), and on Health Surveillance; clarification of Regulation 9 and local exhaust ventilation (LEV), explaining that the legal duty ‘to keep a suitable record of thorough examination and test’ lies with the employer and not with any service provider or consultant; guidance on the principles of good practice has been removed from Schedule 2a of the ACOP and either repositioned next to the relevant regulation (e.g. Regulation 7) or will be made available separately on the HSE website; specialist terminology has been clarified where possible; and information concerning worker involvement and consultation has been amended to be consistent with that in other ACOPs
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
For me in my particular area of activity the latest ACoP contains a number of important changes, in particular referring to identifying chemical hazards, risk assessment and skin health surveillance. This new ACoP is a considerable improvement on the previous versions in terms of its applicability to the real workplace. It is much clearer and more realistic about what needs to be the real approach to the prevention of damage to health due to workplace skin exposure.
Space prevents me from listing all the relevant paragraphs and their implications for adequate control of chemical hazards on this forum, but if anyone wants a more detailed appraisal send me a PM with your e-mail and I will let you have my assessment of the changes and their implications.
Chris
|
|
|
|
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.