Minutes of the 7th Construction Hand-arm Vibration Working Group Meeting, HSE, Rose Court, 09/01/07

Attendees: Phil Burgess (HSE), Hans Fairley (Stihl, AEA), Peter Alford (JCB), Ulrich Betten (Hilti), David Smeatham (HSE), Rob Caddy (Belle Group), Andrew Bowden (Makita), Terrance Libby (ATA Grinding), Peter Holdridge (Complete Hire Services), John Shaw (MACOB Holdings Limited), Kevin Minton (Hire Association of Europe), Louise Brearey (HSE), Mark Turnbull (Speedy Hire), Mark Owen (Shepherds Construction), Shelly Atkinson-Frost (Construction Confederation).

Apologies: Greg Boridiak (BCAS), Neil Mansfield (Loughborough University)

Guest: David Edwards (OPERC)

The meeting was based around an agenda circulated prior to the meeting.

1. Welcome

   Meeting opened and attendees were welcomed.

2. Minutes of meeting held on 17th November 2006

   The following comments were made regarding these minutes:

   • When we refer to cross cut saws ISO19432 can we please change wording to read "petrol / internal combustion engine cut off machines". The word cross cut is a term widely used for wood working saws.
   • The minutes were circulated to the group too late for actions to be completed before the next meeting.
   • The following attachments were not included in the minute distribution.

     These will be distributed with these minutes:

     • Peter Holdridge’s presentation
     • Delivery Plan
   • The group should aim to agree resolutions prior at the end of every meeting.

   Action: To overcome concerns regarding the minutes members are asked to respond to inaccuracies and/or omissions by correspondence so issues can be dealt with promptly.

3. Feedback from HSE MCG OPERC

   Louise Brearey reported to the group the outcomes of a meeting held in 11/12/06.

   Louise described the format of HSE’s supply chain projects to agree industry solutions to improve health and safety management and therefore reduce risk. The projects are enable industry/HSE to effectively communicate solutions through advice and allow HSE, where necessary, to enforce around agreed solutions.

   The meeting concluded:

   • We want a system that is simple and avoids confusion
   • The system should be supported by representatives from the complete supply chain
   • It should be compatible with other systems where appropriate and possible
   • The system needs to be compliant with European Law (hence the need to involve DTI and EU leading to delays we have experienced)
   • The target for system delivery is March/April 2007 and will be based around the initial aims agreed in the initial working group meeting 27/02/06
   David Edwards will present an overview of the HAV guidance produced at OPERC at the next working group meeting (09/01/07)
4. Actions, feedback and developments

   4.1 Vibration database

   An initial database comprising vibration data from three manufacturers was presented. Information from a further three manufacturers is pending. The data is in the format agreed during the 5th Working Group meeting held on 29/09/06. A copy of the initial database is attached to these minutes. A discussion around the suitability of vibration data for risk assessment purposes ensued. The suitability of vibration data provided by the improved machinery directive harmonised standards and tests conducted during typical operation of tools according to ISO 5349 were discussed. It was noted that the gap between the two data sets is closing rapidly. This is because of improvements to the harmonised standards and the need for these standards to provide data indicative of the real-use of these machines.

   The group need to agree that data provided in the database is suitable for an initial risk assessment, and to address users concerns. The outcome from the meeting described in Resolution 1 will inform this debate. (Post meeting note, David Smeatham will produce a technical note outlining HSE’s position on the data, including evidence for comparability of real-use data and that provided by manufacturers)

   The group raised concerns that the existence of two databases (e.g. HSE/Industry working group database, and OPERC database) may cause confusion.
   Also, it was agreed that, where possible, indications of machine/process productivity would be useful.
   It was agreed that David Smeatham and other members of the working group and OPERC should meet to compare vibration data provided by the new standards (including the agreed method of providing data for pneumatic percussion machines) and the data on OPERC’s website. This exercise is aimed at verifying the suitability of sources of vibration data for the purposes of risk assessment. It was noted that data would be treated as commercial in confidence.  D Smeatham will report back at the next working group meeting on 05/03/07.

   Kevin Minton offered HAE’s support to host the working group database.

   Mark Owen stated that MCG are currently committed to their policy of only accepting tools tested to ISO 5349 on MCG construction sites.

   David Smeatham stated that it was now time to put out a call for further vibration information to populate the working group database. This will be done by the distribution of a note to all individuals who attended the HAV Forum in November 2005. HAE will distribute the note to all those notified during the setting up of the initial traffic light system.

       

   Action:	U Betten to provide data from electrical tools.
   	D Smeatham to prepare note and arrange distribution to those who attended the Forum.
   	K Minton to distribute note to those involved in the original traffic light system.

   Resolution 1
   D Smeatham and other working group members will meet with OPERC to compare data provided by EU harmonised standards and data based on ISO 5349.

   Action:	D Smeatham to arrange meeting.

   Resolution 2
   The working group informed by the evidence, should explore the possibility of moving to one database. One solution may be to include tiers of information.

   4.2 Vibration banding

   A number of options, with possible labels were presented to the group, thanks to Kevin Minton, David E, and Peter Holdridge for their suggestions.

   The group agreed that the presentation of vibration data should:
   • Include some element of colour banding,
   • Be based around the exposure action value (EAV) and the exposure limit value (ELV) specified in the Control of Vibration at Work Regulations 2005
   • Include HSE points per 15 minutes
   The group discussed the relative merits of two approaches to presenting vibration data:
   • Banding machines based on the vibration (i.e. similar to the original traffic light system).
   • Banding machines based on the time to reach the EAV and ELV.
   The latter option was favoured because:
   • it clearly stated the point at which action is required,
   • would not jeopardise machines that may be more efficient but have higher vibration,
   • would avoid selection of tools in a lower band where the vibration data is not significantly different (e.g. machine with 4.9 m/s2 being classified as amber and a machine with 5.1 m/s2 being classified as red.)
   • will not inhibit the development of lower vibration machines
   • although the system does not easily cope with multiple machine use, HSE points per 15 minutes will also be provided.

   Although general agreement was made regarding the information to be provided (see Resolution 3). None of the options for presenting the information at the meeting was felt to be entirely suitable, more work is required to look at design, presentation and user perceptions. Shelley Atkinson-Frost offered to assist with user piloting.

   Resolution 3

   The agreed approach to presenting data was:
   • Vibration magnitude based on the batch information (i.e. the aggregated results for a single machine).
   • HSE points per 15 minutes of use
   • Green - trigger time resulting in exposures less than EAV
   • Amber – trigger time resulting in an exposure at or above EAV
   • Red – trigger time resulting in an exposure at ELV

   4.3 Supporting guidance

   D Edwards made a presentation summarising the approach OPERC have taken to producing guidance. This presentation is attached to the minutes. D Smeatham circulated a first draft of guidance on the elimination of hand-arm vibration. This guidance is attached. It was decided that HSE’s leaflet INDG 175(rev2) should be used as the basis for the guidance, and a template developed. Links to HSE’s worker engagement project on HAVs will be explored.

   Resolution 4

   HSE will review INDG175(rev2) particularly for the construction industry and circulate a draft of the guidance and a template for presenting the information before the next meeting.

   4.4 Information, instruction and training

   K Minton has conducted a review of the material produced for the original traffic light system and reported that the review is broadly complete.

   4.5 Verification process

   U Betten presented a document outlining the process of validation to be taken by trade associations to ensure the vibration data in the database in consistent and robust. The group welcomed this. This document is attached to these minutes.

   Resolution 5
   The verification process was agreed by the group subject to it being expanded to cover companies supplying data who are not members of the trade associations represented.

   4.6 System branding

   The group briefly discussed branding of the new system. The use of the traffic light system was not thought to represent the package which includes hand-arm vibration management guidance as well as exposure management.

   Action	HSE to approach their communications team for advice.

5. Date of next meeting

   The next working group meeting will be held on 5th March 2007 at JCB. A smaller group will meet before prior to this to discuss vibration data (re. resolution 1).

   Post Meeting note: The meeting of the 5/03/2007 will now be held at the HSE offices in Leeds and not JCB as reported

6. Close

   Thanks were expressed to the group for a very positive meeting.

7. Attachments
   The following documents are attached to these minutes;
   • Peter Holdridge’s presentation (from previous meeting)
   • Delivery Plan (from previous meeting)
   • Initial database
   • D Edwards’s presentation
   • D Smeatham’s elimination guidance
   • U Betten’s verification document.