Rank: Forum user 
|
Hi all, have had a site survey carried out (by a third party), they are advising 6 areas need addressing (we are able to carry out in-house - i.e. fitting temperature gauges, some insulation, some non-return water valves etc.), they are also requesting (key word) further "options" - site monitoring, training, testing, taking temperatures, disinfecting, sampling etc. My question is - if the initial work is carried out (by us), and WE carry out the disinfecting, monitoring, flushing out etc. would this be acceptable? Have a meeting with the third party next week, don't want to buy something we don't need! the costs for the above are in the thousands! - any thoughts would be much appreciated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
If you and you staff are competent then there is not resaon why you should not do this.
It would have to be done by the book (L8!) and you would have to keep proper records, be consistant etc.
It would also have to be auditable.
Why not talk to your insurers / HSE inspector?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
HI
we do some of the stuff ourselves, temperatures checks, weekly flushes for infrequent used taps and showers, disinfecting, training was done by an outside party and sampling is done by a contractor, we are in the process of having someone trained to take samples which would then be sent to a lab.
I agree with Pikeman that record keeping is key as an L8 visit is always possible.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
As with all things, if you have the in-house competence to do these tasks then you can do them in-house.
However, checking and determining those competence levels is key. Many of the tasks themselves are relatively straightforward but still need to be done in a certain way for a good reason e.g. hot water temp check (sounds straightforward) but need to consider length of time running tap for, where it is within the circuit (also what kind of circuit it is) in order to interpret the result effectively.
Totally fine to do in-house though. Maybe do a gap analysis/review on competence, then buy in training/instruction on legionella awareness and the tasks in question as necessary - retain third party as competent person in the event of specific actions being necessary eg. full system disinfection.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Thanks for the above. Looks like good record keeping (as ever) and a system setup to manage the legionella issue. As mentioned we have had the survey done, we are (more than) able to carry out the remedial works (as listed / itemised in our survey report), routine thereafter, many thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
It would be helpful to know what sort of risk systems you are referring to in order to provide something like an informed answer!
If (as it appears) you are referring to hot and cold water systems then for the most part the competency requirements shouldn't be onerous.
The cynic in me might suggest that the 3rd party may well be 'over egging' the risk and risk management required in order to generate business for themselves.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.