Ecosurety have launched a new website that aims to improve UK recycling levels by increasing transparency and reducing price volatility of the Packaging Recovery Note (PRN) market.
The website, named Circularety, will allow companies governed by producer responsibility regulations to see exactly where and how PRN money is being invested.
The platform is designed to empower producers to seek out approved reprocessors and invest their PRN money in “tangible projectsâ€.
Reprocessors will be able to use the platform to showcase projects that producers can invest in using their PRN obligation money, enabling them to attract larger sums for investment.
Producers are required, under the Producer Responsibility Obligations (Packaging Waste) Regulations 2007, to buy an amount of PRNs equivalent to the weight of packaging they put into the UK market in the previous calendar year. The exact amount is calculated by the Environment Agency (EA) based on estimates of tonnages flowing through the UK economy.
The money raised from PRN fees is fed back into the recycling industry, although a report published by the Chartered Institution of Wastes Management (CIWM) in July found there was a lack of transparency about how exactly the money was being spent.
The new website has been designed to solve this problem, giving producers a direct link to reprocessors and information about the projects they are investing in.
The website enables producers to present detailed PRN expenditure to their boards. It also gives them a marketing boost as they can publicise their environmental credentials using specific examples of how the money is being invested into the recycling industry.
Found this information useful? Sign up for a free trial of the Legislation Update Service here to access regular, more detailed articles.
In relation to health and safety, a hazard is generally defined as ‘a potential source of harm or adverse health effect on a person or persons.’
The hazard hierarchy is a system used in industry to minimise or eliminate exposure to hazards.
A number of control measures can be implemented to reduce the potential exposure to the hazard or to remove the hazard. The hierarchy lists these control measures, in order of decreasing effectiveness. The control measures are:
Elimination
Totally removing the hazard eliminates the risk of exposure and is the most effective hazard control. For example, remove the risk from working at height by having workers perform tasks at ground level rather than at height.
Substitution
This method of control involves substituting a process or material for a safer or less hazardous one. Â For example, substituting benzene with toluene in laboratories. The solvent properties of the two are similar but toluene is less toxic and is not categorised as a carcinogen.
Engineering controls
Engineering controls do not eliminate hazards; instead they isolate people from the hazard. This method involves designing and/or adding physical safety features. This could include placing a barrier between the person and the hazard, placing a guard to remove the hazard from the person, or removing the operator to a remote location away from the hazard.
Administrative controls
These controls change the way people work and include procedure changes, employee training and installation of signs and warning labels. They do not remove the hazard but limit or prevent people’s exposure.
Personal Protective Equipment (PPE)
PPE, including hard hats, gloves, respirators, safety glasses/goggles and safety footwear, is usually seen as the last line of defence and is usually used in conjunction with one or more of the other control measures. It is the least effective means of controlling hazards because of the high potential for damage to render PPE ineffective.
The hazard hierarchy should be taken into consideration when planning controls for hazards. It is important to remember that the control selected must not eliminate one hazard while creating another.
The first health and safety law was put in place over 200 years ago. This infographic highlights some of the key pieces that have shaped health and safety at work.
The European Chemicals Agency’s (ECHA) recent consultation on plans to declare titanium dioxide (TiO2) as a carcinogen has raised concerns in a number of industries.
The substance has been widely used in industrial and consumer products for decades and has no obvious substitute. But ECHA recently consulted on plans put forward by the French authorities to declare it a respiratory carcinogen under the EU Classification, Labelling and Packaging Regulation.
The possibility of the substance being classed as a carcinogen is a big concern for a number of industries as it is used as an ingredient in a wide variety of products, including paint, paper, plastics and sunscreen.
The proposal to class TiO2 as a carcinogen has been put forward due to its low solubility and persistence in the lungs, which can lead to oxidative stress and may also have direct genotoxic effects.
There is no evidence from human data of a link between occupational exposure to TiO2 dust and cancer. However, the International Agency for Research on Cancer declared it a carcinogen in 2006, based on studies in rats. Exposure to the substance led to benign and malignant lung tumours.
There is currently no harmonised classification and labelling for TiO2, although it is sometimes self-labelled as harmful if inhaled, as a skin and eye irritant and a suspected carcinogen.
ECHA has received a large number of responses to its consultation regarding TiO2, highlighting both the economic impact and the lack of any proven effect in people, either as consumers or as industrial workers.
In June, the Government responded to the European Commission’s consultation on its ‘fitness check’ of the EU Chemicals Regulations, stating that the CLP process should better consider socio-economic impacts. This could hinder the proposal to class TiO2 as a carcinogen.
Found this information useful? Sign up for a free trial of the Legislation Update Service here to access regular, more detailed articles.
The International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO) has announced it is revising its energy performance standard – ISO 15001 Energy Management System.
The standard, which was first published in 2011, specifies requirements for establishing, implementing, maintaining and improving energy management systems to help organisations improve energy performance, efficiency, use and consumption.
The aim of the revision is to ensure ISO 5001 remains a useful tool for all types of businesses and organisation around the world.
The revision of the standard is ongoing and experts from nearly 30 countries recently met at an international conference, hosted by the Swedish Standards Institute (SIS), to discuss and advance the revision work.
A draft version of the standard will be available in the fourth quarter of 2017. ISO aims to publish the final revised standard in January 2019.
Found this information useful? Sign up for a free trial of the Legislation Update Service here to access regular, more detailed articles.
The Health and Safety Executive has decided that the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2015 (CDM) will not be supported by an Approved Code of Practice (ACoP).
The HSE agreed that an ACoP would not ‘add value’ to the Regulations. The decision came two years after the HSE was criticised for proposing that the revised Regulations which replaced the 2007 version, should only be supported by guidance.
The HSE has said it will review the situation in 12 months.
When the HSE consulted on the revisions to CDM in March 2014, it proposed replacing the ACoP with guidance. However, only one third of respondents agreed the ACoP should be withdrawn.
The HSE subsequently backtracked and decided it should develop new ACoP if it could be shown to add value.
CDM 2015 came into force last year supported by new guidance,L153.Further guidance documents, one for each dutyholder in CDM 2015, were produced.
Found this information useful? Sign up for a free trial of the Legislation Update Service here to access regular, more detailed articles.
Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) and member state negotiators have agreed tighter air pollution standards for engines used in off-road machinery.
Non-Road Mobile Machinery (NRMM), which include drilling rigs, chainsaws, diesel-powered trains and river boats, are a significant source of air pollution. They account for around 15% of EU nitrogen oxides and 5% of its particulates.
The new regulation will replace Directive97/68/ECand its amendments, alongside a patchwork of national laws. Directive 97/68/EC originally applied only to compression ignition engines but was extended to spark-ignition machinery such as lawn mowers in 2002.
The new law will introduce new emission limits which will depend on engines’ power range, application and fuel. They will be phased in for new engines over 2018-2020.
Reflecting current knowledge of the health impacts of ultrafine particulates, the regulation will limit the number of particulates that may be emitted, the 1997 law only regulates their mass. The negotiations have also added provisions on retrofitting emissions abatement systems. The commission will be required to report on technical and financial provisions for NRMM to help improve air quality in towns and cities by the end of 2018.
A review to establish whether further emissions reductions are needed will take place by 31st December 2020. The Commission will assess implementing real-world emissions testing for NRMM, as is being introduced for road vehicles, by 2025.
MEP Elisabetta Gardini said the deal struck with member states achieved the right balance between environmental protection and being reasonable enough to be applied by those companies that shall implement it in their daily business.
However, Campaign groups have criticised the fact that no particulate matter limit had been adopted for diesel locomotives and the fact exhaust gas treatment systems will not need to be fitted.
The provisional agreement now goes forward for final approval by ministers and by the European Parliament, after which it will be published in the EU’s Official Journal and become law.
Found this information useful? Sign up for a free trial of the Legislation Update Service here to access regular, more detailed articles.
A number of UK firms have applied to continue using chemicals that will be banned in the EU from next year.
The majority of applications to the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA), made under the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) regime, relate to chromium compounds used in industries such as industrial chemicals, vehicle manufacturing, and electronics.
A total of 27 applications covering 39 chemicals were published for consultation on 10thFebruary 2016.
Twelve relate to sodium dichromate, which is toxic for reproduction, carcinogenic, and mutagenic. Eight of those firms that want to continue using sodium dichromate, is as an additive for suppressing parasitic reactions and oxygen evolution, cathode corrosion protection and pH buffering in the electrolytic manufacture of other chemicals.
A further 12 applications relate to Chromium trioxide which is carcinogenic and mutagenic. Uses include chrome plating in engines, plating of military equipment and treatments for metallic articles exposed to harsh environments.
Comments on the new applications can be submitted until 6th Aprilhere. The next step will be for ECHS’s expert committees to consider the applications.
To date, all authorisations applied for have been granted which has been criticised by campaign groups. In contrast, the process for obtaining authorisation has been criticised by industry for being expensive and burdensome.
Found this information useful? Sign up for a free trial of the Legislation Update Service here to access regular, more detailed articles.
Two aspects of the Hazardous Waste Regulations are changing on 1st April 2016.
Firstly, premises in England no longer need to register with the Environment Agency as hazardous waste producers.
Secondly, the format of the unique consignment note code, which appears on every consignment note, will change. These changes only apply to England.
The proposed changes are due to the Strategic Smarter Environment Regulation Review.
From 1 April 2016, this change affects the entire hazardous waste control system.
Organisations that produce or store 500kg or more hazardous waste per year will no longer need to register the premises with the Environment Agency from 1stApril 2016. The organisation must continue to have a valid registration up until 1st April 2016.
To accommodate the removal of premises registration, the format of the consignment note code will change on 1 April 2016 regardless of the amount of hazardous waste produced, stored or handled. The first 6 letters of the consignment note code, currently the premises registration number, will be replaced with the first six letters or number (not symbols) of the company name. Companies whose name is less than six letters will have a filler letter to insert in the remaining spaces.
In addition, ‘exempt’ will no longer be used on consignment notes. The second set of characters will continue to be five numbers or letters of the company’s choosing.
The requirement for the SIC code on the consignment note will also change. SIC 2003 is currently acceptable on consignment notes (as well as SIC 2007 and NACE (European industry classification system)). From 1st April 2016 only SIC 2007 and NACE will be acceptable, as is already the case with Waste Transfer Notes.
Concerns have been raised over confusion that might occur where several companies have the same first six letters, for example National. The Environment Agency view is that this will not be a problem as they will be able to identify the company by the postcode.
The new requirements are due to start on 1st April 2016 but it seems the new regulations won’t be available until then.
The following guidance documents have been updated to take note of the changes:
The Environment Agency has asked that any queries should be directed to the National Customer Contact Centre (NCCC) ([email protected]) or by telephone on 03708 506 506.
Found this information useful? Sign up for a free trial of the Legislation Update Service here to access regular, more detailed articles.
Health and Safety Risks
Loud noise at work can damage people’s hearing and lead to risks to safety. This can include gradual hearing loss caused by exposure to noise over time or damage caused by a sudden, extremely loud noise. Hearing damage can be permanent and disabling. It can stop people being able to understand speech, keep up with conversations or use the telephone.
Hearing loss is not the only problem. Tinnitus is the term used for hearing sounds that come from inside your body, rather than from an outside source, and can including ringing, buzzing, hissing and whistling.
Other safety issues can arise from noise at work because it can interfere with communication, reduce people’s awareness of their surroundings and make it harder to hear warning sounds.
Does your workplace have a noise problem?
Workplaces will more than likely need to do something about noise if the following apply:
The noise is intrusive or worse than intrusive for most of the working day i.e. busy roads, a vacuum cleaner, or a crowded restaurant.
Employees have to raise their voices to carry out a normal conversation when they are 2 metres apart for at least some of the day.
Employees use noisy tools or equipment, e.g. drills, chainsaws or hammering, for more than half an hour each day.
There are noises due to impacts or explosive sources.
Certain jobs and industries are associated with noisy tasks e.g. construction, demolition or road repair, engineering and textile manufacturing.
Law
The Control of Noise at Work Regulations 2005 places duties on employers and self-employed persons to protect both employees who may be at risk from exposure to noise at work and other persons who might be affected by that work.
The actions to be taken depends on the levels of exposure to noise of your employees averaged over a working week and the maximum noise (peak sound pressure) to which employees are exposed in a working day.
The lower exposure action values are daily or weekly exposure of 80dB and peak sound pressure of 135dB. Upper exposure action values are daily or weekly exposure of 85dB and peak sound pressure of 137 dB. Legal limits on noise exposure should not be exceeded – daily or weekly exposure of 87dB and peak sound pressure of 140dB.
Employers are responsible for carrying out a noise risk assessment that includes identifying noise hazards, estimating likely exposure to noise and identifying measures to reduce/ eliminate noise exposure. Employers should take steps to prevent or control the noise and provide employees with hearing protection, if necessary. Training, information and instructions should be provided to employees. A health surveillance, which includes hearing checks, may be necessary if there’s a risk to health.
How to reduce noise:
Use a different, quieter process or quieter equipment e.g. introduce a low-noise purchasing policy for machinery and equipment.
Introduce engineering controls e.g. avoid metal-on metal impacts, add material to vibrating machinery to reduce vibration, fit silencers to air exhausts and blowing nozzles.
Modify the paths by which noise travels through the air to the people exposed i.e. erect enclosures, barriers or screens to block the direct path of sound to the surrounding workplace.
Design and lay out the workplace for low noise emission.
Good maintenance of equipment can reduce noise from friction and moving parts.
Wear appropriate hearing protection and look after it.
Mark hearing protection zones with prominent notices.
