Sg4:10

paddy carr

paddy carr

Moderator
Joined
Jan 15, 2010
Messages
3,919
Reaction score
0
Location
Newcastle upon Tyne
Hi guys
As most of you's will know already, SG4:10 has been compiled, this came about after the HSE, stated, that the Tunnelling and Traversing method contained within SG4:05 was no longer acceptable. (See Appendix A on the NASC website).

The new updated, SG4:10 i am led to believe, encompasses all of the HSE recommendations, and as of when its issued, Advanced Guardrails and step-up platforms, at the top end of the Hierarchy of Controls.

How will this effect the Offshore,Petro,Gas,Refinery and Power station Scaffs, who the majority of their time, are doing Hangars and erecting through Steelwork,Pipework and other obstacles that appear in there daily routine?

Regards
Paddy
 
No mate i havent got SG4:10

But as i stated, "I am led to believe" so it is not,100% info, however, we will see. The NASC will adopt HSE recommendations as they are the Dogs dangly bits when it comes to setting the standard for workplace Guidlines,ACOP's and Regulations.
 
DAY 3: Thursday
13.30 PASMA
A debate: Industry cannot afford the cost of converting to advance guardrails and should stick to the tried and proven 3T method.
David Tait and Andrew Gray, Glasgow University Debating Society


Access Industry Forum

worth a listen to , they reckon there hasnt been enough accidents since sg4:05 to justify cost of change
 
this is depressing news again,its got well passed the where is it going to stop stage,its becoming stupid........madness in fact.i belive everybody should go home safely everynight but things have got well out o hand.iv been laid off two weeks because a chap fell 3m and bruised his bum and arm,complete site shutdown,how do company owners keep up with all this tosh.
 
I was at the NASC Northern region meeting last week, where Simian Risk gave a short presentation on SG4:10. At present it's still in draft format, with the final version anticipated being ready for approval next month with issue before the end of the year.

Essentially, a lot of what is in SG4:05 will be carried over into the new version. The major change, which we've known was coming for the last 5 years, is the removal of the unprotected traverse up to 21'. A protected traverse using double lanyards to ensure 100% tie off is allowed under SG4:10, but I would assume only after the collective methods have been ruled out as impracticable.

Essentially, this means an advance guardrail method will be expected to be the norm, although this encompasses a whole range of options, eg. step ups, aluminium guardrails, sliding rails, etc.

Could be worse :amazed: - some at HSE wanted to see all scaffold erected using cherry pickers, including independents, birdcages, etc. wherever possible, which rather defeats the point of putting scaffold up in the first place :weird:
 
Mark_ISL said:
I was at the NASC Northern region meeting last week, where Simian Risk gave a short presentation on SG4:10. At present it's still in draft format, with the final version anticipated being ready for approval next month with issue before the end of the year.

Essentially, a lot of what is in SG4:05 will be carried over into the new version. The major change, which we've known was coming for the last 5 years, is the removal of the unprotected traverse up to 21'. A protected traverse using double lanyards to ensure 100% tie off is allowed under SG4:10, but I would assume only after the collective methods have been ruled out as impracticable.

Essentially, this means an advance guardrail method will be expected to be the norm, although this encompasses a whole range of options, eg. step ups, aluminium guardrails, sliding rails, etc.

Could be worse :amazed: - some at HSE wanted to see all scaffold erected using cherry pickers, including independents, birdcages, etc. wherever possible, which rather defeats the point of putting scaffold up in the first place :weird:
Click to expand...

Mark thank you for that information mate, much appreciated.
 
At Fawley were putting in 1 m lifts. I dont think advance guardrails and step up brackets would work in a refinery its to congested. As for hangers I havent a clue what they expect you to do to comply with it?????
 
Maybe a 'Step down' platform,;) for hangars, or you have to do a 4 week 'Freefall' course with the Parachute Regiment, however, that is being silly,as the CISRS,NASC wont recognise the 'Para's, as a suitable competent training force for 'Parachuting':D
 
As i see it SG4:10 wont make hardly any difference to companies who have been working for large main contractors like Kier, Bam, Carillion and the like as they are working to it anyway.
Anyone who says it will take them longer hasn't been working safely prior to its issue. We all know that some companies need to work to SG4:00 yet.
 
rumple said:
As i see it SG4:10 wont make hardly any difference to companies who have been working for large main contractors like Kier, Bam, Carillion and the like as they are working to it anyway.
Anyone who says it will take them longer hasn't been working safely prior to its issue. We all know that some companies need to work to SG4:00 yet.
Click to expand...

You probably hit the nail on the head there rumple, as no matter what we think of any safety measure if the main contractor demands it on his site then we will be left with little choice but to use these things, and you know these firms you mentioned and others will be falling over themselves to be the first to introduce them as a requirement to work on their sites and therfore be at the cutting edge of safety.:suspicious:
 
SG4:10 will be out the end of october 2010 remember it is only guidence.Never forget the words where reasonbly practical, the risk assessment will become very important?
 
instructor said:
SG4:10 will be out the end of october 2010 remember it is only guidence.Never forget the words where reasonbly practical, the risk assessment will become very important?
Click to expand...

Yeah mate, it is only Guidance, however, the guys with the wig and black gown would like to know why this Guidance/ACOP was not carried out if God forbid the proverbial sh1t hit the fan.
 
As long as the risk assessment is above the guidence and a higher control of safety is put in place no problem. I feel everyone is making a big deal out of this.
 
Bang on Paddy, they will go through the motions to introduce it to the masses but the truth is the decision has already been taken and it will probably just have been easier to start to get used to using these things.

---------- Post added at 09:11 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:07 PM ----------
instructor said:
As long as the risk assessment is above the guidence and a higher control of safety is put in place no problem. I feel everyone is making a big deal out of this.
Click to expand...

Instructor, I was on a site last week where I was required to wear a life jacket, fair enough you might say, but I was building a ramp for a mini crane so my feet never left the ground and I was working behind a permanent hand rail. Any normal man doing a risk assessment would have realised that a life jacket was not needed as there was no danger of falling in the water but the mc wants a belt and braces approach on their sites and I can assure you that means advanced hand rail for all.:suspicious:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom