Proactive inspection of non major hazards is one of the tools used to contribute to the overall compliance objective of reduction in the incidence of ill health and injuries at work, and contributes to the HSC/E Revitalising Health and Safety and Securing Health Together targets aimed at reducing working days lost, the incidence of accidents and the incidence of ill health. However, given the small size of the inspection teams compared to those in FOD the contribution will necessarily be small.
Nil.
For HID this activity is limited to:
Note: the Biological Agents Unit does not inspect sites where there is planned release of genetically modified plants or animals i.e. the sites of field trials of genetically modified crops.
These proactive inspection programmes are met by:
An estimate of 0.2% of HID's total resource is directed towards inshore diving inspection and 1% is directed towards inspection of non-major hazard activities involving GMOs.
Costs are recovered for the proactive inspection of work with transgenic plants and animals in contained glasshouses and growth rooms as part of an Agency Agreement with DEFRA. This amounts to about 70K per annum. There is no cost recovery for all the other aspects of these programmes of proactive inspection.
Why
With both of these proactive inspection activities, relating to GMOs and onshore diving, part of the justification of the work lies in the fact that the lessons learned in these non-major hazard activities can often be read-across to related major hazard work.
In the case of the inspection of activities involving GMOs part of the justification relates to societal concerns about work of this kind. One consequence of these societal concerns is that there is a permissioning regime, which covers some of the activities covered by this proactive inspection programme.
Whilst the main driver for the inspection work of the Biological Agents Unit is to fulfil HSE's statutory role in enforcing the safety legislation covering the genetic modification of micro-organisms in contained facilities, the Unit also inspects some other activities on behalf of other parts of Government. These are primarily activities involving work with genetically modified plants and animals in contained glasshouses or animal houses but there is also a growing amount of work relating to the deliberate release of modified micro-organisms in vaccine and gene therapy trials. These additional areas of work are done under an Agency Agreement with DEFRA (see above). This additional work can be justified in terms of "joined-up" Government. Virtually all of the research organisations working on the contained use of genetically modified plants and animals will also be working on the genetic modification of micro-organisms. This also tends to be true, albeit to a lesser extent, of research organisations involved in vaccine and gene therapy trials. Therefore, since inspectors within the Biological Agents Unit have the necessary expertise, it makes sense in terms of efficiency and consistency for the safety aspects of these additional areas of work to be covered at the same time as work with micro-organisms.
The inshore diving sector has a particularly high rate of fatalities, additionally OSD provides support to Local Authorities in this area.
Proactive inspection is the primary method of ascertaining that duty holders are managing risks and complying with the relevant regulations and ACoPs, (specifically the Diving at Work Regulations 1997, the Genetically Modified Organisms (Contained Use) Regulations 2000, the Environmental Protection Act 1990, the Risk Assessment (Records and Exemptions) Regulations 1996, and the Deliberate Release Regulations, 2002). It identifies problems, unsafe practices, compliance with standards and adherence to best practice, it enables breaches of the regulations to be identified for consideration of enforcement action.
Over the three years up until 2003/4 there have been 5 fatalities per year across the range of work sectors covered by inshore diving, a significant proportion where there is an 'at work' element.
Across the sector covered by the Biological Agents Unit compliance with safety legislation is generally regarded as being good, this is particularly true of the pharmaceutical industry. However, it needs to be recognised that the good safety record of the sector as a whole may be leading to some complacency.
With the exception of the activities that are classified in the Major Hazard Block, this programme addresses all of the risks that are directly associated with activities involving work with GMOs. These are primarily the risks of workers becoming infected but environmental risks are also covered. This programme also addresses all risks associated with inshore diving.
Nil.
As the biotechnology sector becomes more mature there may be some scope for reducing proactive inspection activity at those premises where the risks are lowest. For example, the small biotechnology companies that are starting-up in science parks around the country tend to undertake work that is very low risk. Such companies rarely have the inclination or finance to undertake work aimed at the modification of pathogens. However, given the extent of current societal concerns about the technology it is extremely doubtful that such a reduction in inspection activity could be justified for several years. There is limited scope for reducing activity relating to inshore diving due mainly to the relatively large number of fatalities.
Like other proactive inspection activity there is not and cannot be evidence to show that this programme will fully achieve the objectives however in the longer term it would be expected that there might be a fall in numbers of reported accidents and incidents.
In the case of GMOs we are really only establishing a baseline level of reporting at this stage. This is because up until recently the enforcement of legislation covering GMOs was under-resourced and many duty-holders were unaware of the requirement in the GMO (Contained Use) Regulations 2000 to report accidents.
In the case of the proactive inspection of inshore diving indications are that in 2003/4 there has been a marked improvement in the fatality rate and significant progress, mostly through this programme is being made in the sector.
There are two base assumptions:
Other options have not been considered.
The main priority business risks are:
Control measures for the above business risks are in the process of being developed.
Approximately 7 staff years are directed to Proactive Inspection of Non Major Hazards at an estimated cost of 415,680 (376,090 staff costs and 39,590 GAE).
Nil.
The main engagement in the inshore diving sector is via OSD's work with the Recreational Diving Committee.
The main interface of the Biological Agents Unit with its stakeholders is through the Advisory Committees covering GMOs and pathogens (ACGM and ACDP respectively).
HID is responsible for delivering this contribution to HSE's Securing Compliance Programme. There is no single programme manager within HID. Heads of Division are responsible for delivery of their contributions to the HID programme.
The programme detail is put together from HID's OG Core operating plan - resources are allocated to it at Unit level. The aggregation of this is shown above under resources and costs.
The latest Greenstreet Berman report concludes that proactive inspection, supported by enforcement, is an effective tool in meeting our objectives.