Rank: Guest 
|
Posted By garyh
I note that the "Cabinet office" or whatever is considering tightening up Safety standards around sites like refineries etc (of course they were "already considering this"). Yeah right.
My points:- presumably this was a higher tier COMAH site, which would have had a Safety report accepted by the Competent authority (CA). Who got it most wrong then - the CA or the site operator? Guess who will take the rap? Who has power without responsibility?
If legislation (COMAH) is inadequate (and this I doubt!), then of couse Govt and CA will apologise for the mega hassle that COMAH has put UK Manufacturing through, and for putting though inadequte legislation ..........don't hold your breath!
How can Govt (and assorted idiot local / politicians) be even considering reacting when the investigation cannot possibly be complete?
The truth is, legislation is driven by politicians reacting to perceived public concern. Not science, not logic, not even risk assessment.
Anyone think different?
Season's greetings!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By peter gotch Gary, Might not have been either operator or the competent authority who got it apparently wrong in terms of proximity of external structures. Some indication on web that the plant was built first and that domestic and commercial developments subsequently encroached. When a development is proposed within the consultation zone around a major hazard, the local authority are required to consult the competent authority. HSE review the risks to those at the site of proposed development using "PAHDI" software. Their policy as to whether to oppose development is set out in "R2P2" at http://www.hse.gov.uk/risk/theory/r2p2.pdfThis policy does not take account of any holistic H&S benefits e.g. relocation of people from a higher risk location, or new infrastructure that would reduce risk of road traffic accidents, and, perhaps ease evacuation from major accident and/or make it easier for the emergency services to attend. Policy also does not take account of any socio-economic benefits. Planning Authority may [and, sometimes, do]choose to grant permission for a development despite opposition from the competent authority. Consultation zones around major hazards have recently been substantially enlarged. Regards, 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.