Welcome Guest! The IOSH forums are a free resource to both members and non-members. Login or register to use them

Postings made by forum users are personal opinions. IOSH is not responsible for the content or accuracy of any of the information contained in forum postings. Please carefully consider any advice you receive.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
waterside999  
#1 Posted : 29 June 2022 15:02:11(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
waterside999

Hi, be good to hear some advice on an issue I am dealing with.  The location where I work has 3 subterranean lift pits.  The pits themselves are approx 6 feet deep and are provided with fixed ladders and house task lighting for the pit and electrical systems (not HV) for the corresponding passenger lift.  I am required to complete on site a 'Confined Spaces Register' for the site and I have included these pits in that register.  I have done this for two reasons.  1. The pit itself has limited access and is predominently enclosed, other than the open pit cover when access is required.  The specified risk is a risk of fire and explosion as contractors (a big multinational lift supply and servicing company) may carry out live electrical working to fault find.  2. In case of a medical emergency, lets say heart attack it would be difficult to rescue the person to use a defib on them which we have on site to give them the best chance of survival.

I have pushed the contractors to detail on their risk assessment (we operate a permit to work system) how they expect to rescue a casualty from the lift pit without using a harness (which we would provide) and we could then use our rescue tripod to effect a rescue if required.

Question 1: Do you consider that the lift pit is a confined space under the Regs?

Question 2: Irrespective of whether the lift pit is a confined space or not, under a risk assessment do you consider requiring contractors to wear a harness so we can rescue if necessary is over burdonsome?

Happy to hear views from fellow professionals.

peter gotch  
#2 Posted : 29 June 2022 15:37:00(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
peter gotch

Hi Waterside.

Question 1 - I doubt it that this would be a confined space within the meaning of the CS Regulations, in the course of normal inspection and maintenance, as I think the reference to fire and explosion is aimed at scenarios where there may be flammable materials around to ignite rather than a simple bang arising from shorting of electrical conductors.

The HSE ACOP and guidance has the following to say:

Flammable substances and oxygen enrichment

24 A risk of fire or explosion can arise:

(a) from the presence of flammable substances, for example from fumes left in a tanker previously used for transporting petrol;

(b) from an excess of oxygen in the atmosphere, for example caused by a leak from an oxygen cylinder forming part of welding equipment;

(c) from the presence of chemicals that can combust or spark in enriched (or in some cases normal) oxygen levels;

(d) from the ignition of airborne flammable contaminants such as flour dust; or

(e) due to leaks from adjoining plant or processes that have not been effectively isolated

I thought the Lift and Escalator Industry Association might comment and found Microsoft Word - MWG N11rev3 (leia.co.uk)

...which doesn't mention the Confined Spaces Regulations - but nor does it mention the Electricity at Work Regulations 1989, probably as live working should not generally be needed to be done in a lift well.

....and I would be wanting to ask why any such live working would be envisaged.

Question 2 - seems to me that a rescue plan would be required to comply with multiple legislative requirements OTHER than those in CSR.

Less convinced that this automatically means opting for harnesses.

Used by the wrong people who are not fully competently trying to drag someone out of a lift pit might due more harm than good.

P

Edited by user 29 June 2022 15:38:27(UTC)  | Reason: Left hand working more efficiently than right hand, thence typo

stevedm  
#3 Posted : 01 July 2022 10:21:57(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
stevedm

Question 1 - Yes

National Classification 2 (NC2) - Medium Risk (Could be NC3 dependant if there is a further movement in the hole.

Question 2 - Yes.  Moving an unconcious body is difficult at the best of times.  Harrnesses are required just to get the dumbass out that is even before I can try and get him breathing again...in an emergency you can use anything to effect the extraction as there is a threat to life.. 

Why are construction guys so obsternate...I am all for pragmatism but macho doesn't go well when thier mate is in the back of an ambulance or coroners van...ever heard of 'recklessly endangering the life of another'...if they need justification I will try and post some relevant accident cases if I can find the links...

Sorry for the rant wasn't really directed at you...been a long week 

peter gotch  
#4 Posted : 01 July 2022 12:21:10(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
peter gotch

Steve - unless you are referring to a different system of classifications the National Classifications NC1-NC4 were published by Water UK Confined Space Update Ed 2 2 Oct2009 (water.org.uk)  with clear rationale for why these might be selected.

This is not a water industry scenario and it would be interesting to hear why you think that it would be comparable to NC2.

As example, you wouldn't expect a pit beneath a lift to be half full with decomposing sewage. In the event that the concrete or brick construction was cracked and there was water ingress, I think the norm would be to pump out the liquid BEFORE entry.

achrn  
#5 Posted : 01 July 2022 14:06:33(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
achrn

Originally Posted by: stevedm Go to Quoted Post

Question 2 - Yes.  Moving an unconcious body is difficult at the best of times.

Being difficult to move an uncoscious body from the space is not one of the specified risks, however.  It would be difficult to get an unconscious casualty off the flat roof of our office (hatches, ladders, walkways etc) but I very much doubt anyone would classify the flat roof of a building as a confined space.

With respect to the original posting - my undertsanding is that it's normal to take the defib to the casualty, not extract the casualty from wherever they are and take them to the defib.

I don't classify our lift shaft or pit as a confined space.  However, I don't know the arrangement at yours that might lead to it being reasonably foreseeable that it fills up with flammable fumes. An electrical fault in ours is less likely to start a fire than an electrical fault almost anywhere else in the building - there's less fuel in the bottom of the lift pit (bare concrete walls etc) and I can't foresee it filling with flammable fumes.  There are oil drip pans under the guide rails, but the thread inspired me to have a look and there's very little in them.

stevedm  
#6 Posted : 27 July 2022 05:30:41(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
stevedm

Originally Posted by: peter gotch Go to Quoted Post

Steve - unless you are referring to a different system of classifications the National Classifications NC1-NC4 were published by Water UK Confined Space Update Ed 2 2 Oct2009 (water.org.uk)  with clear rationale for why these might be selected.

This is not a water industry scenario and it would be interesting to hear why you think that it would be comparable to NC2.

As example, you wouldn't expect a pit beneath a lift to be half full with decomposing sewage. In the event that the concrete or brick construction was cracked and there was water ingress, I think the norm would be to pump out the liquid BEFORE entry.

Sorry Peter I wasn't ignoring you I just couldn't access the site....

I consider the Water Industry guidelines and associated C&G training to be best practice.  Whether this is a water industry scenario or not really doesn't matter in my view.  As you would be aware the defintion on NC2 is what most would call a standard entry - Entry Supervisor and Entrant and where the entry supervisor can see the entrant - horizontal of vertically. Ageed with the water ingres in what has been said so far but needs consideration in your isolation..still has at least 2 specified risks - asphixiation, and loss of conscousness arising from an increase in body temperature.  There is also the fitness requirements and medical and the risk of sudden incapcitation (cardiac arrest as an example) along with location as it has an impact on the type and provision of medical first aid.  Sorry for the late reply and rambling a bit just on one coffee so far :)

achrn  
#7 Posted : 27 July 2022 07:37:36(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
achrn

Originally Posted by: stevedm Go to Quoted Post

still has at least 2 specified risks - asphixiation, and loss of conscousness arising from an increase in body temperature. 

Why is the risk of those things greater in the lift pit than in (say) the corridor outside the lift pit?

stevedm  
#8 Posted : 28 July 2022 14:12:15(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
stevedm

Originally Posted by: achrn Go to Quoted Post

Originally Posted by: stevedm Go to Quoted Post

still has at least 2 specified risks - asphixiation, and loss of conscousness arising from an increase in body temperature. 

Why is the risk of those things greater in the lift pit than in (say) the corridor outside the lift pit?

are you seriously asking that question...how much reciculating air is there is the space as opposed to a corridor?....
Users browsing this topic
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.