MARCO MUIA: DIRECT AND TO THE POINT
www.oaktree-environmental.co.uk
TCM issues put in spotlight at EA assessor fora
IN EARLY October the Environment Agency (EA) previewed newly- introduced and proposed changes that aff ect our industry with senior offi cers making key presentations at the regional WAMITAB assessor fora. The agenda included waste crime consultation No.2, which is a follow up to the original consultation and is the main driver for the coming changes proposed in legislation and practice. This consultation No.2 relates to operator competence, exemption reform and fi xed penalty notices for household duty of care. I wanted to make you aware of all proposals, but sadly only have space to cover the Technically Competent Manager (TCM) issues this month with the others likely to feature soon. Also on the agenda at the assessor fora was the TCM site attendance levels (the focus of this article); strategic review of charges (which came into force in April); and the Waste Treatment Best Available Techniques (BAT). The BAT relates to tightening up requirements on emissions from installations to air and water (including sewers), which may require signifi cant investment. The change is immediate for new installations with existing operations having a grace period of four years to comply. The clear legal requirement for sites to have a TCM go out was during the permitting regime change in April 2008. In addition to this, new permits require adherence to the CIWM/WAMITAB Competence Scheme, or EU skills Competence Management System (CMS). However, there are many old permits that need to be renewed and there’s no explicit requirement to notify the regulator of TCM name, the certifi cate
level, rate of attendance, or a procedure to disqualify those who break rules.
No clear legal requirement to have a TCM
The EA plan to make it an explicit legal requirement to have a TCM, which would enable the use of proportionate sanctions such as compliance or suspension notices. I can see the benefi ts in this as sites that have trained staff at signifi cant cost would not be disadvantaged.
Requiring operators to inform the EA who their TCMs are?
The EA’s proposal is to make a new legal requirement (early 2019) for operators to notify the EA of their TCM arrangements, most likely to be achieved by requesting the information every quarter (most sites), or annual waste returns (scrap/ELV sites). The planned implementation date for the waste return change is April 2019, with information to be fed into a database to enable eff ective monitoring. I agree with this as it is simple and nothing more should be needed. The legal requirement to inform the EA a new TCM has been appointed, backed by the waste return proposal, would enable monitoring of the number of sites that the new TCM covers. It would also, in my opinion, protect TCMs.
No means to disqualify poorly performing TCMs
WAMITAB qualifi cations are currently a qualifi cation for life with the ongoing requirement to undertake a continuing competence test every two years. I don’t see a need to change this if the person has – and continues to demonstrate competence. Taking a qualifi cation away presents signifi cant diffi culties, which was presented in the waste crime consultations.
MARCO MUIA
MARCO Muia BSc (Hons) MSc MCIWM is a Director of Oaktree Environmental Limited and a respected industry professional. He specialises in all aspects of waste planning and regulation consultancy. Waste expert Marco also holds the level 4 COTCs for Hazardous Waste Treatment and Transfer, and is available for consultation.
30 SHWM November, 2018
You can contact Marco on: 01606 558833. If you have any questions about this article or want advice, e-mail him via:
marco@oaktree-environmental.co.uk Follow him on Twitter @wastechat
www.skiphiremagazine.co.uk
The EA’s alternative proposes a system for TCM or CMS registration, which I am guessing would work like waste carrier registration, for example, misbehave and your registration gets suspended, or revoked. This idea needs work as TCMs are often not the person in fi nancial control of operations and site owners can disregard their advice. However, it does provide an alternative in the short term to address poor performance and support the system with detail. I would like to see a proportionate system that has temporary suspensions rather than permanent as there are other legal remedies for preventing poor operators from starting new operations. Any TCM which forms part of the management of a site that has been prosecuted or has a poor compliance record can be prevented from operating a new site under current permitting rules.
TCM attendance
The EA are proposing a similar approach to attendance levels as a percentage of operational hours which is used today, with the likelihood most operators will require 20%+ attendance amongst other coming proposals. While most of the proposals appear to be sensible I have diffi culty with an arbitrary level of TCM attendance. I have provided cover at sites where minimal attendance was agreed because the various compliance duties and reports were carried out by the site manager who was working towards his qualifi cation. I feel the best performing sites should be able to put forward a case for reduced attendance, which would be similar to the CMS system where a company demonstrates a level of competence as a whole rather than through individuals.
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
