seekingcounsel


Treat wood with caution


WHAT a surprise it was at the recent trade show hosted by Skip Hire Magazine, to be inundated by a series of questions about regulatory and permitting requirements concerning the taking in and treating of wood.


It seems to be the view of many small scale waste operators that they can actually treat wood under the benefi t of an exemption (namely a T6 exemption), as opposed to having the benefi t of a permit.


My response to this would be to treat this approach with caution.


The diff erence between an operation continuing under a permit, and an exemption, is crucial. By means of a permit, the operator carries out an operation at a site where waste is recycled, treated or disposed of.


The relevant point is a permit is required if the nature of the waste brought onto the site is of mixed waste. This is not necessarily, solely restricted to recycling or the processing of wood.


Responsibility to be cautious at all times


FOLLOWING on from enquiries we had at WASTE’17, I thought it appropriate to consider some of the HSE aspects of fire control.


Key for those attending concerned the Environment Agency approach to Fire Prevention plans that minimise the likelihood of fi re breaking out at a site. These include the provision that waste operators must not store waste for longer than six months, and also specify the storage and separation distance between stacks.


Operators from metal, wood and tyre recycling have already expressed concern over the conditions set out. There have been moves to suggest sector specifi c fi re guidance, rather than a catch all.


Both the British Metal Recycling Association and Wood Recyclers Association are seeking to develop their own templates to assist the industry.


There can be little doubt such engagement assists all, but I thought it appropriate to consider the original Fire Safety Order from


22 SHM July, 2017


An example of this would involve wood, where this forms part of a mixed load from construction waste.


In contrast, a T6 exemption allows an operator to tip, cut, or shred untreated waste plant matter, so treated waste is suitable for an intended use such as the manufacture of chipboard.


Importantly, an exemption does not allow the operator to collect wood from any types of waste, or treat this waste where the main purpose is disposal. For this, the operator requires a permit.


An operator treads a fi ne line to ensure any wood brought on to site is either a mixed load or treated wood. He or she must also be sure about precisely which purpose was the wood taken in for.


Deemed as treated wood


Businesses have to be very careful - even where painted or chemically treated wood is brought on to site as this may be deemed as treated wood (and not be covered by a T6 exemption).


At the moment, there is no stringent testing by the Environment Agency regarding operators with a permit or T6 exemption, especially when it comes to wrongly handling treated wood.


2005. This gives a useful overview of how a statutory instrument applies, and the enforcement options open to the Regulator.


This places duties and responsibilities on a company and individual to comply, particularly in relation to protecting any “relevant person” from fi re at their premises.


It includes a requirement to carry out a fi re risk assessment, and instigate then measures to comply with the 2005 Order.


This is tragically topical given recent events in London, but equally likely to have a lasting impact on the Environment Agency and fi re and rescue authorities.


Part 2 deals with Fire Safety duties, which no doubt all are familiar with. There are some really sensible and cost eff ective measures suggested, along with an ever present duty to risk assess.


It would defi nitely be useful for the industry to engage with relevant Experts at this point, to formulate procedure and promote a sensible risk averse policy which is safety aware and promotes certainty.


The penalties for not complying with the Fire Safety Order from 2005 are obvious. There are also enforcement measures brought by the Fire Authority or HSE who have extensive powers to:


• Enter and inspect premises without the use of force.


THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE LAW


Philip W. Jones is a member of New Bailey Chambers in Liverpool, and has been a practicing Counsel for many years. He was employed by the Environment Agency as a lawyer, and heads a practice on regulatory, environmental and planning issues.


If an operator fi nds himself in a position where there is an allegation he is dealing with treated wood, then this can only be proven by testing.


Alarmingly, many operators under the assumption they were dealing with untreated wood have found they were in fact, processing and recycling treated wood – a clear regulatory breach.


The simple and most cost eff ective way of dealing with this issue is to establish the nature of the wood at source, by asking the supplier questions as to the nature and quality of the load.


From an operator’s point of view, I certainly hope the Environmental Agency does not adopt a stringent testing policy.


If you want advice about stockpiling wood, please get it touch.


Dominic McNabb is an experienced solicitor in private practice with MJP solicitors, and has over 20 years’ experience defending individuals and companies, in both criminal and regulatory matters. CALL HIM VIA: 0773 3264226 OR EMAIL HIM ON: skiphireanswers@ peak-associates.com


• Make inquiry • Ascertain compliance with the order Identify the responsible person


• Order production of any records (including plans) to be kept by virtue of the order


• Require any person having responsibilities to provide assistance


• Take samples of any articles or substances to ascertain fi re resistance or fl ammability


There are a variety of punitive options, including suspension, prohibition alterations, and enforcement notices - which can be challenged, if dealt with robustly.


A sensible approach to a robust sector specifi c guide is still being sought, and the industry needs to be aware of underlying sanctions which may be applied, and the changing climate for regulation and enforcement.


www.skiphiremagazine.co.uk


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68