Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Paul Darby I am currently planning asbestos surveys for our UK buildings, some were built in the 60's and 70's so clearly are highly likely to contain asbestos, but some were built in the 90's and some last year.
Obviously there is not likely to be asbestos in the buildings commissioned last week, but around what time did its general use in construction stop?
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Robert K Lewis HSE date is 1999. Everything built beyond Jan 2000 is therefore asbestos free in HSE view. Although rare instances may exist, but these are discountable.
Bob
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Paul Darby Thanks for the response, I thought it would have been earlier in the 90's than that, thanks very much for the info.
Cheers
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Robert K Lewis Paul
Unfortunately too many organisations take it to be 1995 but the prohibition was on supply, but not installation, at that time. Existing stocks of material continued to be used.
Bob
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Dave Wilson Pre 85 could have ALL types of products as that was when Blue / Brown banned
Artex banned in 92
All remaining uses of white asbestos in Nov 99.
Surveys for buildings built after 2000 is one piece of paper as Reg 4 allows you to use 'Good Evidence' to this effect.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Doug Kelly Paul
This has been discussed before but:
In brief outline:
Asbestos (Prohibitions) Regulations 1985 - prohibited import, supply and use of crocidolite and amosite (grunerite), prohibited asbestos spraying, prohibited asbestos insulation
1988 - prohibition of paints, varnishes with some exceptions
1992 - prohibition on supply and use of certain products containing chrysotile, including textured coating
1999 - import, supply and use of products containing chrysotile, with some 'scheduled' derogations e.g. safety-critical applications
These applications allowed certain types of manufactured products to be installed where no suitable/safe asbestos-free product was available. The schedule to the 1999 Regs should be consulted for precise information - you can do a search for this on the OPSI website.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Dave Wilson The 1999 Regs have been repealed and this info has basically been incorporated in CAR 06 in Part 3 with the exemptions in Schedule 3.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Adrian Watson Paul,
The reality is that the prohibition regulations lagged behind years behind practice.
The asbestos industry within the UK virtually collapsed overnight in 1980. Consequently, asbestos insulation board was not manufactured after 1980. However, some asbestos cement products were still manufactured and imported until around 1990. However in both cases old stock would have been available and used.
Pragmatism suggests that AIB was not used after 1985 and cement products after 1994. You will of course find exceptions to the rule.
Regards Adrian Watson
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By JPK Sorry to add a piece of 'hear say' to the subject matter, but I have been made aware on a number of occasions of asbestos being found within products in buildings constructed as late as 2003!
Alot of 'reclaim' products used in buildings may still contain traces of asbestos or have been manufactured in their day using asbestos.
JPK
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Adrian Watson JPK,
Please elucidate. What, when and where?
Regards Adrian Watson
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Robert K Lewis JPK
I did make the rider that such instances are rare enough for the HSE advice to stand. All such installations were illegal and obviously clients would not employ incompetent contractors who perform such actions. I do know one or two attempts with period items but these are not difficult to spot for the experienced practitioner:-)
If the HSE tell me 2000 that is good enough for me.
Bob
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Doug Kelly Dave
Repeal of the '99 Regs by CAR06 would not have prevented use of the 'derogated' items until then. I thought Paul's query was about history rather than present status.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Dave Wilson Fair point but was just pointing out where you can find this info today.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Bruce Sutherland Hi Adrian
Survey of student accommodation - Loughborough Uni
building gutted back to shell in 2002 -
I found asb in the following new stair nosings - chrysotile
new porchey bits to make the refurb look pretty - AC verge packing - chrysotile
obviously no one told the world vinyl market not to put it in or the roofers that they should stop using it for verge packing
obviously risk is minimal and the point is anorakishly made ......but......
I would also point out that there were not inconsequential amounts of chrysotile imported into the UK in the 1990's according to figures I have seen
Cheers
Bruce
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Robert K Lewis Bruce
Key point in your statement is "gutted back to shell" - this means that asbestos is still foreseeable - the HSE view is the 2000 applies to Newbuild not "refurbished after". Not only that but you have evidence a criminal act has taken place. Have you talked to the owner to get reparation under the defects liability clauses of the contract? If not I would do so urgently.
Bob
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Bruce Sutherland The ACM was all newly installed - nothing to do with the fact that it was a refurbishment - I think you will find that there are many many instances of this type of situation.
For example we know of a large contractor who had to turn 2 loads of slate away becasue they realised it was asbestos artificial slate.
Regards
Bruce
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Robert K Lewis Bruce
Interesting assertion and if this is so it needs to be brought to the attention of the HSE. The installation was finally banned in December 1999 and any installations as described are therefore illegal. If it is not reported to the HSE then the problem will continue. The fact that the original building was not demolished means that the structure is a pre 2000 structure and asbestos could foreseeably be encountered unless there is adequate evidence to the contrary to demonstrate it is asbestos free.
Any structure owner in the position you describe must go back to the original contractor to have the defect remedied without charge. Our professional reputation relies on giving timely and adequate responses and advice.
The example of the PC is interesting - what made him suspect the tiles were asbestos based? Were they ultimately sampled? Was the supplier/importer identified? Were the HSE involved? All of these are vital questions if we are to eliminate the worst occupational health situation of the last and this century.
Bob
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Bruce Sutherland Hi Robert
I really do not think that ALU has time to deal with things like this - if you look at the risk that has been created then it is not high. Whilst I agree in principle one of the issues is how do your deal with product imported on a world basis - for example if the BS for vinyl in the UK used to have chrysotile as an ingredient why would countries that still mine asbestos and have a vinyl industry not use it - and why would a UK buyer even think that it may be coming in - Steve Shutler who many will know from a lab he ran in the Midlands has a really good link to a CNN newsreel about asb in common products like duct tape!!
I do find it strange that a country like the USA has such as relaxed attitude to the issue -perhaps it is because it is in the soil!!! Adrian may know the answer - and why do they treat lead paint like that / or more importantly why do we not ..... risk or commerce?
I think you will find that most UKAS Inspection Bodies will have similar tales to this and that if you take the incidence of AIB in buildings post 1985 then it is an issue but not necessarily a huge issue.
Regards
Bruce
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Robert K Lewis Bruce
4,500 deaths plus per annum must worry us and it is really the principle of the ongoing installation. I think the ALU really has to get a handle on it.
Bob
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Josh Scogin It must also be noted that buildings as late as 2005 can contain asbestos materials. The materials i have identified in buildings of this nature have all been in situations where the material has been moved from another building.
For example - Ironing boards that contain a cement heat plate.
Safes which contain AIB / cement linings.
And even cement or lagged water tanks have been moved into modern buildings.
its seems as though this situation crops up when a company moves to another building, and take the ACMs with them.
regards
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Robert K Lewis Josh
It is precisely these activities that are prohibited and yet we seem to be saying on this forum that we know this is happening, have concerte examples to offer the regulator and are not actually doing anything about it other than to say the 2000 date is irrelevant.
To be honest I am concerned.
Bob
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Josh Scogin Bob
firstly i do not want to alarm you, these are rare cases HOWEVER your claim of "2000 is irrelavant" stands, in my eyes. I forgot to mention that roof tiles to a 2002 building have been identified as chrysotile aswell.
This is definately an issue that is not correctly legislated by the HSE in my opinion. Property owners hear this 2000 date thoery , and therefore do not feel the need to proceed with a "duty to manage" attitude towards asbestos containing materials.
A very good subject to discuss
regards
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Robert K Lewis Josh
If contractors did not illegally install ACMs the 2000 date would not be an issue. My clients are only too happy to manage their asbestos but contractors should not be adding to their problems by "erroneous" practices and breaches of contract. All forms of construction contract that I am familiar with proscribe the use of prohibited materials. If they are being used post 2000, and we have evidence, we need to do something about it as part of our duty under the code of conduct with regards to the wider society.
Unless people are prepared to inform the regulator of malpractice by contractors they are helpless to enforce the regulations.
Bob
|
|
|
|
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.