YCF Events Brochure

Official Guide

SevesoIII Official Guide.indd 1 05/10/2012 10:17:14

• StructuralRehabilitation• SpecialistChemicalResistantCoatings• Confinedspaces• ConcreteRepair• InfiltrationEngineering• PipeliningandRepairs• HighPressureWaterjetting

SPECIALISTS IN CHEMICAL INDUSTRY INFRASTRUCTURE MAINTENANCE

CONTACT US FOR MORE DETAILS

E:[email protected]:01924499338 07762536636

www.oranmore-esl.co.uk


Event Programme9:00 Registration Exhibition opens Networking breakfast and refreshments served.

10:25 Welcome, Jill Mooney, YCF

10:30 Sandra Ashcroft, Health and Safety Executive ‘Seveso II to Seveso III - the journey’

11:00 Jill Wilday and Susan Fraser, Health and Safety Laboratory. Will Seveso III affect your COMAH status?

11.40 Comfort Break

11:50 Aidan Whitfield and Daniel Gaskarth, Environment Agency. Environmental aspects of Seveso III

12:30 Doug Leech, Chemical Business Association Major Hazard regulation from an SME viewpoint

13:00 Lunch & Exhibition

14:00 Paul Jackson, BAMA Seveso III and Aerosol Storage – An Industry View

14:30 Afternoon Tea Break & Exhibition

14:45 Chris Poulton, International Planning Policy Department for Communities and Local Government Hazardous Substances Consents under Seveso III

15:15 Open Panel Discussion

16: 00 Close & Thank you

• StructuralRehabilitation• SpecialistChemicalResistantCoatings• Confinedspaces• ConcreteRepair• InfiltrationEngineering• PipeliningandRepairs• HighPressureWaterjetting

SPECIALISTS IN CHEMICAL INDUSTRY INFRASTRUCTURE MAINTENANCE

CONTACT US FOR MORE DETAILS

E:[email protected]:01924499338 07762536636

www.oranmore-esl.co.uk


General Information

Business FacilitiesThere is a small business centre you can drop in and out of throughout the conference day, please speak to a Armouries staff member. Cloak RoomPlease use the rails provided in the conference room or use the main museum cloak room for £1 per item. First AidPlease contact the Armouries Function Manager who is first aid trained and is dedicated to our event. Any incidents must be reported directly to him. Internet AccessRAI offers a basic wireless internet connection for free. Lost PropertyDelegates are asked to check that they have all belongings before you leave but if anything is left then please contact the Armouries office the following day. TaxisWe advise that you use Amber Cars - 0113 2311366. WashroomsAll delegates should use the facilities on the first floor but there are signs to these and others throughout Royal Armouries Museum SmokingRoyal Armouries Museum is a no smoking venue. Please make your way outside should you wish to smoke.

WelcomeWelcome to the SEVESO III: Are you Prepared? Conference and Exhibition, the review of the changes made to the SEVESO II directive.

In this Official Guide, you will find informative technical papers, profiles from our speakers and advertisements from our exhibitors.

We would like to thank you for your support by attending the event and special thanks must be given to our official sponsors, Link Associates International, ABB and Oranmore Environmental Services Limited.

We hope that you enjoy the Conference and Exhibition, if you have any questions throughout the day please contact one of the team.

You will find a feedback form in your delegate pack. Please complete this and put it in the box on the registration desk for your chance to win a bottle of wine and chocolates.

Kind regards

YCF and HSL teams.

EVENT SPONSORS:

A Guide to the European Standard for Safety Storage Cabinets (BS EN 14470-1)

For further information please visit us in the exhibition today

the Science of Success www.labtex.co.uk01484 600200

In this Labtex White Paper:Safety Storage Cabinets Overview

What must a Safety Storage Cabinet be able to do

A comparison of the fire resistance of cabinet constructions

Consequences of the standard in Europe

Approval documentation

Conclusion

White Paper


A Guide to the European Standard for Safety Storage Cabinets (BS EN 14470-1)

For further information please visit us in the exhibition today

the Science of Success www.labtex.co.uk01484 600200

In this Labtex White Paper:Safety Storage Cabinets Overview

What must a Safety Storage Cabinet be able to do

A comparison of the fire resistance of cabinet constructions

Consequences of the standard in Europe

Approval documentation

Conclusion

White Paper


Speaker ProfilesSandra Ashcroft – Health & Safety Executive

Sandra is a career civil servant and currently holds the position of Senior Policy Adviser with responsibility for chemical industries policy in the Health & Safety Executive. She has been the lead negotiator for the UK for the European Directive on the Control of Major Accident Hazards Involving Dangerous Substances Directive (known as Seveso III) that has recently concluded following a long period of negotiations. She was a member of the European Technical Working Group on Seveso and the Globally Harmonised System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS) which was tasked with investigating the best way to align the GHS classification categories with Seveso. She works actively as a member of the European Expert Group for Seveso.

She is involved in the work of the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe and is a member of the Working Group on Implementation for the Industrial Accident Convention. Sandra has taken part in missions and the delivery of workshops in Bosnia and Herzegovina and other parts of the UNECE region.

Jill Wilday BSc CEng FIChemEJill Wilday is a chemical engineer with over 30 years experience including 12 years working for ICI and over 20 years for HSL. She has provided support to HSE on various aspects of COMAH for many years, including predictive and process safety assessment of safety reports, the COMAH Remodelling project, and looking at the potential impact of the Seveso III Directive. She also runs training courses on ‘COMAH Remodelling’, ‘Predictive aspects of COMAH’, and on ‘Seveso III’. She has provided scientific advice help inform the UK negotiators of the Seveso III Directive, which has included trying to estimate the number of sites which may be affected by changes to the scope of the Directive.

Susan Fraser BSc, MScSusan is a higher scientist in HSL’s Occupational Hygiene Unit. She joined HSL in 2004 and initially worked in immunology. Susan is currently working as the technical lead in the human health risk assessment team, where she works with the process safety section to align chemicals to the Global Harmonisation System; this work has informed the negotiations for the regulation and classification of hazardous chemicals and their directives in the EU. She also works with the Chemicals Regulation Directorate in the Health and Safety Executive to assess exposure to biocides used in the workplace. In addition to this, Susan reviews other toxicological information, for example for the high production volume chemicals scheme and has written a chapter of guidance for the IGHRC about the techniques that are currently available to assess the risks of chemicals to human health.

Douglas Leech BSc, CChem, CSci, MRSC, CMIOSH, FIIRSM, AIEMADouglas Leech is the technical Director of the Chemical Business Association based in Crewe. He joined the association in 2003 following over twenty years in the product formulation sector in both health & safety and R & D roles.

As the Technical Director for the Chemical Business Association (CBA), he is responsible for providing advice and assistance to member companies on legal, regulatory and compliance issues.

He was involved in major hazards in both operational, training and advocacy roles in the UK and Europe. He participated in the expert group where the harmonisation of Seveso with the CLP regulations was debated over a number of years to provide advice to the European Commission prior to the formulation of the new Seveso III directive.


Speaker Profiles

Mr. Aidan WhitfieldAidan is a Senior Advisor at the Environment Agency and is leading the implementation of the Seveso III directive. He has 15 years experience in head office roles, working on the COMAH regulations, Environmental Permitting Regulations and the Industrial Emissions Directive.

He previously spent five years as an Agency site officer regulating major industrial processes and users of radioactivity at sites in Essex and North London. He is a Chartered Engineer and a Fellow of the Institution of Chemical Engineers. He started his career working in the UK process industries for 8 years, manufacturing speciality organic chemicals and activated carbon.

Mr. Daniel GaskarthA Chartered Chemical Engineer, Daniel Gaskarth worked in a number of roles in process design and chemical manufacturing before joining the Environment Agency in 2004.

His role within the North West team is as a technical specialist regulating sites under the COMAH and Environmental Permitting Regulations.

Daniel is currently seconded to the HSE HID Strategy Unit working on the implementation of the Seveso III directive.

Chris Poulton BA (Hons) DipTP MRTPIChris Poulton is a chartered town planner and a team leader in the Planning directorate at the Department for Communities and Local Government. Prior to joining International DCLG he was head of Strategic Planning at the Government Office for London, leading on government input to strategic level planning in the Capital. Before joining the civil service Chris worked on the Mayor of London’s Spatial Development Strategy, the London Plan. During this time he had particular responsibility for economic development and housing.

Chris is now team leader on international planning policy at DCLG. He leads input on issues of Territorial Cohesion, manages the ESPON programme in the UK and represents England on the British Irish Council spatial planning workstream. He also acts as link officer for planning simplification in the Sheffield City Region Enterprise Zone.

Chris leads on planning for hazardous substances policy at DCLG. This includes land-use planning requirements of the Seveso directive, the Hazardous Substances Consent regime and planning for developments around hazardous installations.

Paul Jackson

Paul is a Physical Chemist by training gaining a Ph.D. in Surface Chemistry at The University of Newcastle upon Tyne in 1985. This was followed by 8 years working in research and development in the field of Environment Technology at Cambridge University, industry and government laboratories. In 1993 he became the Principle Scientist for the UKEB, which was the UK Governmental Body working on the EU Eco-labelling Scheme, an environmental labelling scheme for consumers. In this post Paul gained a wide experience of environmental issues related to consumer products, and especially the interface between science and politics. In 1998, he moved to BAMA as Technical and Environmental Manager, recently being promoted to Technical Director.

This is a wide ranging role covering things such as safety in the design, manufacture and supply or aerosols, the safe use of aerosols and the environmental impact of aerosols.


LAND USE PLANNING BEFORE AND AFTER SEVESO IIIOpinion paper prepared for Yorkshire Chemical Focus by Shulmans LLP

Introduction1. The planning system in England has been going through a tumultuous period over the last 12 months or so. Seen by the Coalition Government as one of the obstacles hampering economic development, planning has been subject to a push to delegate powers to local level, and to engage (and not just consult) with local communities - and all at a time when the National Planning Policy Framework (“NPPF”) has stripped out most of the primary, if not the underpinning, guidance that has been part and parcel of the system for so many years. Many Local Planning Authorities (“LPAs”) are a long way off having the up-to-date Development Plans that are critical to the new system operating effectively.

2. At the same time as acknowledging the importance of increased public involvement in local decision-making, the Coalition knows that there must be development if the economy is to be kick-started. Furthermore, many of the facilities that are necessary to fulfil local or regional needs, are often extremely unpopular with the local communities that will play host to them. Localism is portrayed in the popular press as either a developers’ charter or a bucolic indulgence.

3. All of these developments will bring about changes to land use planning for major hazard sites, in addition to those that will result from the transposition of the Seveso III directive. This paper considers the current system for obtaining planning and hazardous substances consents, and then looks at some of the differences that are likely to arise both as a result of Seveso III, and domestic developments (including proposed changes to both guidance documents and legislation). The paper is concerned specifically with the law as it relates to major hazard sites.

Planning Consents4. Planning permission is required for the construction and (generally speaking) modification of major hazardous facilities. The application for permission is processed and determined by the LPA, but there are a number of consultations that the LPA must undertake before refusing or granting permission.

5. Article 10 of the Town and Country Planning (General Development Procedure) Order 1995 stipulates that the Health and Safety Executive (“HSE”) and the Environment Agency (“EA”) are amongst the statutory consultees for applications:

• relating to the siting of new major hazard establishments;• relating to modifications to existing establishments which may have significant repercussions on major accident hazards; or• for transport links, locations used by the public and residential areas in the vicinity of existing establishments, where the siting or development are such as to increase the risk or consequences of a major accident.

6. So both the EA and the HSE must be consulted on planning applications for the construction of new COMAH facilities and changes to existing ones. But they must also be consulted on proposed new developments in the vicinity of COMAH sites, which could be affected in the event of a major accident.

7. To take account of the changes brought about by the NPPF, the EA has produced four quick guides on its website, dealing with the NPPF itself, as well as its implications for specific issues such as flood risk. It also issued a draft guidance document in May 2012, on how to deal with developments that require both planning permission, and an environmental permit. This has attracted responses from a number of bodies in sectors as diverse as waste, and farming. It is not clear whether the EA will change the draft substantively, but it is likely to be issued in its final form in the autumn of 2012. Paragraph 37 of this paper deals with the document in more detail.

8. The EA encourages pre-application engagement by companies/developers, so that any concerns that it has about a prospective development (whether for or to a major hazard site, or in proximity to one) can be addressed before the application is submitted.

9. The HSE is consulted on both applications for planning permission, and hazardous substance consents. The hazardous substances consent regime is discussed in more detail in paragraph 20 below.

10. There must always be adequate separation distances maintained between major hazard sites, and developments such as residential, public open spaces and natural habitats.

11. HSE sets a consultation distance (“CD”) around major hazard sites, which will determine when it needs to be consulted – development within that zone will require HSE’s involvement. The consultation distances are set on the basis of risk assessment, including the potential effects of any major accident. The information is communicated to LPAs, which then have a statutory duty to consult HSE on any development within the zone.

12. HSE has developed its own guidance mechanism, known as PADHI (Planning Advice for Development near Hazardous Installations). The system is used for planning applications, but not applications for hazardous substances consents. There is an online service, PADHI+, which the HSE made available to LPAs in 2006/2007. This enables them to obtain advice from the HSE without having to send paperwork to an area office. However, the


HSE may need to offer more direct specialist resourcing on complex applications. PADHI+ can be used to provide an indicative response to pre-planning enquiries.

13. The PADHI system assessment of whether a proposed development is acceptable or not is based on two considerations:• the zone in which the proposed development is located. The HSE designates three zones that make up the CD around a COMAH site. They are the outside zone, the middle zone and the inner zone. They run concentrically around the ite, with the inner zone being the closest to it; and• the sensitivity level of the proposed development. There are four levels, from 1 to 4, increasing in sensitivity.

14. PADHI operates on a matrix based on these factors which will result in a decision of either DAA (Don’t Advise Against Development) or AA (Advise Against Development). Although in principle behind the matrix is simple, it allows for degrees of sophistication and for results to be adjusted depending on individual site circumstances.

15. The system generally works well, but an example of when communication between an LPA and the HSE broke down is the case of Health and Safety Executive -v- Wolverhampton City Council [2012] UKSC 34. The case went all the way to the Supreme Court earlier this year. The Council granted planning permission on 4 August 2008 for four blocks of student accommodation. There was an LPG facility only 95 metres away from the nearest of the four blocks. The Council had consulted the HSE using the PADHI+ system, and had received the HSE’s opinion that there were sufficient safety grounds to justify refusal. That opinion was reported to the planning committee, which was advised by its officers that although the recommendation was not binding on the Council it “should not be overridden without careful consideration”. The advice of the officers was four-square with the planning Circular 04/00, which gives guidance on planning controls for hazardous substances, and which touches on the HSE’s role in the consideration of both planning applications, and hazardous substances consents (see paragraph 20 below).

16. The Supreme Court quoted the words of one of the Judges in the Court of Appeal, who summarised what happened next:

“Despite this warning, when considering the planning application Wolverhampton failed to consult further with the HSE, failed to obtain its own advice as to the safety implications of permitting a substantial amount of residential accommodation in this location and, despite being obliged to do so, failed to give the HSE advance notice of its intention to grant planning permission for the development, and failed to notify the HSE that it had granted permission. The HSE first discovered on 16 December 2008 that planning permission had been granted, over four months after the grant of permission and, since works had commenced prior to the grant of permission, five months after the works had commenced.

By the time HSE became aware of the development, works on three of the blocks, A, B and C, was well advanced. Work on block D, which was the closest block to the LPG facility, had not commenced.”

17. The repeated failures to consult the HSE meant that it was unable to consider whether to exercise its right to ask the Secretary of State to call-in the application. The Council should have given the HSE 21 days’ notice of its intention to grant planning permission, to allow for proper consideration of the merits of requesting a call-in. The HSE’s response was to ask the Council to consider one of three options: first, partially revoking the planning permission for the student flats, using its powers under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. That option would have meant that the Council would have to pay the developer compensation, and would be particularly problematic as so much of the development was nearly complete; second, moving the LPG facility from its existing site, using compulsory purchase powers if necessary, which could also result in the Council facing a public inquiry, and a substantial compensation bill; and third, amending the LPG’s hazardous substance consent (see paragraph 20 below), to reduce the amount of LPG it could keep on site. The HSE’s preference appears to have been for a revocation order in respect of the planning consent for the flats. Discussions took place over several months, with the Council indicating in May 2009 that it could not see any justification for revoking or modifying that permission. Finally, the HSE, in June 2009, notified the Council of its intention to judicially review both the grant of permission (although technically outside the three month limitation period for such actions), and the decision not to revoke.

18. The Court of Appeal held that the only feasible option open to the Council would have been the partial revocation of the planning permission, and that the Council had failed to consider it properly – therefore the decision not to revoke was unlawful. By the time the case reached the Supreme Court, the only issue that the parties wanted the Court to consider was whether the Council had been entitled to take into account as a material factor the question of the compensation it would have had to pay the developer, when deciding whether to exercise its discretion to revoke. On that point, the Supreme Court held that it was. So, perversely, the Council made the right decision, but for the wrong reasons.

19. In addition to the duration of the legal process (some four years from the grant of permission, to the hearing in the Supreme Court) the case raises a number of interesting issues for major hazard sites. First, the fact that the possibility of relocating the site, or limiting site capacity, was actively considered by the HSE/Council is a serious concern. It seems harsh that the site should have faced potential closure because of an administrative error by the Council. It shows the importance of sites engaging with the planning system when development (especially of a sensitive nature) is proposed in its vicinity. Second, where there is an error of this nature, the Supreme Court’s decision confirms that a Council in similar circumstances will be justified in doing


nothing if the figures do not add up. Whilst there is a clear logic in safeguarding the public purse, it means that sites may be left having to manage the consequences of having inappropriate developments as neighbours. This can potentially lead to operational constraints and challenges, such as nuisance actions for noise, odour or plume deposition, by local residents, or even other businesses, even where the site long predates the neighbouring developments. There was a brief period of hope for operators when the High Court held in 2009 that compliance with a site’s permit could provide a defence to such claims – only for that decision to be overturned on appeal.

Hazardous Substances Consents20. Any site that stores or uses certain hazardous substances will need a hazardous substances consent from the LPA. This will be in addition to planning permission, and an environmental permit, if required. The statutory framework is the Planning (Hazardous Substances) Act 1990, and the regulations made under it, all of which is supported by DCLG’s publication, Hazardous Substances Consent: a Guide for Industry; and planning Circular 04/00. The regime is intended to implement the land use planning provisions of Seveso II.

21. Applications for planning permission and hazardous substances consent, although they must be made separately, can be dealt with together, as the LPA will generally determine both. The consent, once issued, must not contain any provisions that conflict with Part 1 of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974, which sets out the main duties of employers towards their employees, and third parties such as members of the public. The purpose of the controls are perhaps best summed up in the Guide for Industry, which says that: “Even after all reasonable practicable measures have been taken to secure compliance with the requirements of the 1974 Act, there will remain the residual risk of an accident which cannot entirely be eliminated. The controls will ensure that this residual risk to people in the vicinity or to the environment is taken into account before a hazardous substance is allowed to be present in a controlled quantity.”

22. The HSE and EA are both consultees in the process – the HSE on risks to people, and the EA, on risks to the environment. The HSE will establish a CD around the site, as it would for planning applications, meaning that it will then be consulted on any future developments within the outer, middle and inner zones.

23. Although the HSE’s approach to hazardous substance consent applications is similar in principle to that for planning applications, it does not use PADHI, and HSE specialist risk assessors will normally be involved in responding to the consultation.

Seveso III and the potential changes to planning practice24. Before turning to the planning issues raised by

Seveso III, it is worth briefly mentioning its focus on the Aarhus convention, most notably the need for public consultation, and the provision of information to members of the public. This is a theme that has found expression in our domestic legislation, in particular, the Localism Act 2011.

25. By way of example, Article 11 requires that the public is consulted on new or updated off-site emergency plans, in accordance with the procedure and principles set out in Article 14.

26. Article 13 extends the scope of the information that currently has to be made available to members of the public who could be affected by a major accident. For top-tier sites, that will include a summary of the major accident scenarios. This information has to be kept permanently available online, and provided to a central EU database.

27. Article 14, which is new, is based directly on Aarhus, and requires member states to ensure that the public is able to give its opinion on a range of matters, including planning applications for new or modified facilities, as well as the off-site emergency plans prepared pursuant to Article 11. However, it is not simply a question of consulting the public: Article 14 speaks of also allowing reasonable time-frames for all stages of the consultation process, to allow “for the public concerned to prepare and participate effectively in environmental decision-making…”.

28. Article 22 contains a new provision on access to justice on environmental issues, which must be fair, equitable, timely and not prohibitively expensive. Injunctive relief is to be made available.

29. It remains to be seen to what extent the public participation principles now embodied in Seveso III will give rise to increased litigation. In a domestic context, it is worth remembering that protective costs orders (“PCOs”) are available for litigants with limited means who wish to challenge decisions by regulators, and they allow for a capped level of costs exposure in case the less well-funded litigant loses; and that environmental cases often have a public interest/public importance element that can make them suitable candidates for this type of order.

30. In terms of the planning aspects of Seveso III, the principal provision is Article 12. It stipulates that member states should take additional technical measures at existing sites, over and above simply allowing separation distances, so as not to increase the risks to human health, and the environment. All lower-tier operators will have to provide, at the request of the competent authority, sufficient information for land-use planning purposes on the risks arising from their establishment. Article 12 does not specify what that information might be, and presumably, member states will need to determine that at a domestic level. It also requires the integration of land use planning procedures with those under the EIA directive.


EA/Forestry Commission/Natural England Consultation on their role in development31. The three bodies published a consultation document on their role in the development process, Building a better Environment, on 9 September 2012.

32. The document addresses the respective areas of expertise of the three bodies, and the developments for which they are statutory consultees. As well as encouraging pre-application discussions, the document contains hyperlinks to the pre-planning enquiries form on the EA’s website.

33. Section 4 of the document sets out which of the three bodies will take lead during the planning process on 14 environmental themes, all designed to address sustainability. Potential developers are also reminded of the need to consider two cross-cutting topics, which affect each of these themes: climate change; and ecosystem services (described as meaning the benefits we get from nature). Development proposals need to be prepared with these two topics in mind.

34. The 14 themes include issues such as managing waste, sustainable construction, and landscape character.

35. The final section of the document lists the permits and consents that a developer may need, in addition to planning consent.

36. Comments on the proposals are invited until 19 October 2012.

Draft EA Guidance on Planning and Permitting37. In May 2012, the EA issued its working draft document, Guidelines for Developments requiring Planning Permission and Environmental Permits. Consultation closed on 15 June 2012, but the final version of the document has not yet been issued.

38. The purpose of the Guidelines is to clarify the relationship between planning and permitting (no doubt because of the demise of PPS23); and to increase certainty over planning and permitting decisions.

39. The EA recommends parallel tracking of planning and permitting applications, for more complex developments. In terms of the demarcation between planning and permitting, the Guidelines contain a number of worked examples which attempt to show the scope of each discipline in practice.

40. There is a range of possible responses from the EA to planning and permitting proposals, as outlined in the Guidelines. On planning consultations, these range from standard responses, which can be included as informatives in any planning consent; to an expression of

“serious concerns”; through to “showstoppers”.

41. Appendix 1 consists of sector-facing guidance, on the locational factors that will influence the EA’s planning and permitting responses for certain technologies, including landfill, AD and composting. In each case, there is a list of showstoppers (which would lead to an objection); matters giving rise to no objection, but where the EA still has serious concerns; and informatives.

42. A number of industry bodies made representations, both positive and negative, about the Guidelines. The Environmental Services Association (“ESA”) has been putting forward comments on behalf of the waste industry, which will be one of the sectors that will be most directly affected by the proposals.

Conclusion43. Whether the changes that have been proposed domestically and by the EU will speed up the decision-making process for major hazard facilities remains to be seen. There is a tension between the requirements for public engagement, and the delivery of development for manufacturing purposes, which is sorely needed. It is to be hoped that what we will see is genuine engagement on both sides of the planning process, and a constructive dialogue between industry and the general public.

Shulmans LLP29 September 2012

DisclaimerThe information contained in this paper does not constitute legal advice.

Contacts:

Mark Lumley0113 297 772707946 780989;

Lyn Dario0113 297 377907506 920367

www.shulmans.co.uk


About LINKStete ttt6 te htee teetee ttth the eeeteee teeuetet tee teeuetet eeeteeeteetee te exeeeee, ueeeeettee tee eeeetee tee the ttee etege et etete thtt theettee eegtetettieeet We tutee plans, procedures tee the personal competence et eeeeee the tee exeettee te eteee eegtetettieee eut et teeuteet eINK heeee teue tueteeee te ttetge thete etet, eeettteteteg te eteeeee teete euth te:

Emergency Management, Crisis Management, Business Continuity, Health & Safety, Corporate Communications

RECOVERstronger

COMMUNICATE with your

stakeholders

PRACTICE your response for

tomorrowPREPARE

todayExhttttiee tee Netteetteg

Offittte Seeeeee

eINK Aeeettttee Ieteeettieete teINKt te t eeeteeeteete tetteteg tee teeeuettett eeeeteee ttth eeee e6 tetee et exeeeteete te etet Mtetgeteett We eeeetee eetttitte tetteteg ueteg simulated disaster scenariost

Oue Tetteteg Seeutieee teteuee:

e chemsafe eeeee e eeeeeeeeeeee Petttitte Eteegeett Mtetgeteet e Ietteeet Ceeteeeeeee Ceueeee Meett, Cetete Cettuettttieee & Pe

Tetteteg

Get te teuth te fiee eut tteut eue Open courses tee in-house training!

Het tte teu ttetge teue etet tee tteeeee teue

eeeeeeee te eteegeettee?

At teue ette

eINK Ieeet Heuee, eeeeee

eINK Teeet Heuee, teett

e Tetteteg e Exeetteteg e eeheteetee

LINK Associates InternationalSpecialists in Risk Management

teett ttttttttte eeeetteeeeee ttttttett ttttttttetetetetteeetttteettetttttetetteeetttteettet

More demanding legislation and public scrutiny is increasing the need for operators to demonstrably improve the safety of their operations. ABB Consulting provides an expert independent view on where improvements should be made and on how best to implement them for the global process industries. Our services include: alarm management, hazardous area management, COMAH assessments, human factors, pressure relief, Process Hazard Reviews (PHR), HAZOPs, SIL studies and technical training to ensure safer operations. www.abb.com/consulting

ABB Consulting. The experts in process safety.

ABB ConsultingTel: +44 (0)1925 741111E-mail: [email protected]

Seveso III (YCF) - A4 Sep 2012.indd 1 12/09/2012 15:31:15SevesoIII Official Guide.indd 12 05/10/2012 10:17:51

About LINKStete ttt6 te htee teetee ttth the eeeteee teeuetet tee teeuetet eeeteeeteetee te exeeeee, ueeeeettee tee eeeetee tee the ttee etege et etete thtt theettee eegtetettieeet We tutee plans, procedures tee the personal competence et eeeeee the tee exeettee te eteee eegtetettieee eut et teeuteet eINK heeee teue tueteeee te ttetge thete etet, eeettteteteg te eteeeee teete euth te:

Emergency Management, Crisis Management, Business Continuity, Health & Safety, Corporate Communications

RECOVERstronger

COMMUNICATE with your

stakeholders

PRACTICE your response for

tomorrowPREPARE

todayExhttttiee tee Netteetteg

Offittte Seeeeee

eINK Aeeettttee Ieteeettieete teINKt te t eeeteeeteete tetteteg tee teeeuettett eeeeteee ttth eeee e6 tetee et exeeeteete te etet Mtetgeteett We eeeetee eetttitte tetteteg ueteg simulated disaster scenariost

Oue Tetteteg Seeutieee teteuee:

e chemsafe eeeee e eeeeeeeeeeee Petttitte Eteegeett Mtetgeteet e Ietteeet Ceeteeeeeee Ceueeee Meett, Cetete Cettuettttieee & Pe

Tetteteg

Get te teuth te fiee eut tteut eue Open courses tee in-house training!

Het tte teu ttetge teue etet tee tteeeee teue

eeeeeeee te eteegeettee?

At teue ette

eINK Ieeet Heuee, eeeeee

eINK Teeet Heuee, teett

e Tetteteg e Exeetteteg e eeheteetee

LINK Associates InternationalSpecialists in Risk Management

teett ttttttttte eeeetteeeeee ttttttett ttttttttetetetetteeetttteettetttttetetteeetttteettet

More demanding legislation and public scrutiny is increasing the need for operators to demonstrably improve the safety of their operations. ABB Consulting provides an expert independent view on where improvements should be made and on how best to implement them for the global process industries. Our services include: alarm management, hazardous area management, COMAH assessments, human factors, pressure relief, Process Hazard Reviews (PHR), HAZOPs, SIL studies and technical training to ensure safer operations. www.abb.com/consulting

ABB Consulting. The experts in process safety.

ABB ConsultingTel: +44 (0)1925 741111E-mail: [email protected]

Seveso III (YCF) - A4 Sep 2012.indd 1 12/09/2012 15:31:15SevesoIII Official Guide.indd 13 05/10/2012 12:19:15

Who are YCF?

When was YCF started?YCF was born out of a Yorkshire Forward regional development agency programme initiated to support Chemical Manufacturing in Yorkshire.

What types of companies qualify to become members of YCF?YCF supports manufacturing throughout the UK, therefore

any company manufacturing products, e.g. chemicals, FMCG, food, drink and pharmaceuticals etc are welcome to join. We actively promote cross sector activities. We also welcome applications from those companies who offer services to the manufacturers. We do not exclude any companies who require our support, regardless of its size.

How can you help me?YCF aim to be the bridge between industry and everything else. We aim to be a manufacturing trade association that meets and exceeds our member’s expectations and can help to overcome their challenges.

We are addressing key areas of need though our network groups, which are kept current and relevant by their own industry steering group. The industry steering groups are made up of experts in their chosen field who are able to drive the network groups forward, meet member’s requirements and provide tangible outputs from each meeting. Our network groups include – REACH, Manufacturing Skills, Fire and Security, Safety Net, Health and Beauty, Food and Drink, Manufacturing Excellence and Supply chain.

We also run a range of events and training programmes for our members, often in conjunction with regulatory bodies or our members. Please take a look at our website for further details.

How can you get involved?To become a full member please see our website for details of the different types of membership. Memberships fees are tiered depending upon the size of your business and the number of employees you have, these range from £250 to £1500 per annum. If you are a full member you will receive free access to the Network Groups and reduced rates to other events or training through the year. If you would like to be kept informed of YCF activities as an Associate Member and to be added to our email list please contact us via our website. Please note there is a charge for Associate Members to attend Networks, Events and Training Sessions.

Contact us - www.ycf.org.uk / 01484 346540 / [email protected]

YCF is led by Jill Mooney. Jill is a Chartered Engineer and has been actively involved in manufacturing for nearly 20 years, having worked for Design Consultancy Kvaerner Process, FMCG manufacturer Unilever UK in their European Engineering Centre of Excellence and also at their Sourcing Units in Port Sunlight and Leeds for 10 years before moving to Rohm and Haas, later Dow Chemical as Reliability Manager. She was also actively involved with the Institution of Mechanical Engineers having sat on Regional Panels in Yorkshire and the North West and also as part of the Executive Committee at the London HQ.

Jill is ably assisted by Lisa Buck who has a background in Membership Organisations having worked for the Professional Footballers Association in Manchester. She has worked as a HR Officer for Hallmark Cards Manufacturing, Bradford and as an Account Manager for Lloyds TSB.


Note Page:


The Seveso III Directive: Control of Major Accident HazardsJill Wilday, Health and Safety Laboratory

Welcome to this conference and exhibition about the Seveso III Directive, which was adopted in July 2012 and will come into force, within revised COMAH regulations in the UK, in June 2015.

The Health and Safety Laboratory (HSL) is the UK’s leading health and safety research facility employing over 350 scientific, medical and technical specialists. We have a long track record of effective operation throughout the UK and beyond. Our capabilities encompass a wide range of topics including: human factors and risk assessment; fire, explosion and process safety; occupational and environmental health; safety engineering; work environment and specialist photographic and technical services. This breadth of expertise underpins our particular strength in creating multidisciplinary teams to solve health and safety problems. While most of our work is for the Health and Safety Executive (HSE), HSL are also able to offer commercial services to industry.

HSL’s involvement with the Seveso III Directive, began in 2003 supporting HSE with the initial discussions through to the negotiations in Europe which concluded this year. The main reason for a new directive is that Europe has agreed to adopt the international Globally Harmonised System (GHS) for the classification of chemical substances and mixtures. This is enshrined in the European Chemical Labelling and Packaging Regulations (2008) (CLP) also fully coming into force in June 2015 when the Dangerous Substances Directive and Dangerous Preparations Directive will be repealed. Seveso II uses these directives to determine its scope, hence the need for a new Seveso III Directive using CLP to define the scope.

You will hear about the main changes that Seveso III will bring about, together with initial plans for implementation in the UK. In particular:

• Changes to Annex 1 (Schedule 1 of COMAH) which have both - the potential to change the COMAH status (top tier, lower tier or non-COMAH) of individual sites; and - the need for changes in hazardous substances consents for existing COMAH sites;• New arrangements for assessment of major accident potential of substances;• Greater requirements for the provision of information to the public.

The biggest potential changes in scope concern substances that give rise to acute human health effects. The current classifications of ‘very toxic’, ‘toxic’ and ‘harmful’ will be replaced by GHS categories 1- 4 for acute toxicity. Thresholds differ depending on whether exposure is via the oral, dermal or inhalation routes and the GHS thresholds do not correspond to those of the current classification system. Compromises had to be made to decide how to align the new GHS categories with the Seveso qualifying quantities.


The diagram shows the Seveso III alignment. Those GHS categories which have qualifying quantities equivalent to the current ‘very toxic’ category are shown by the dark blue shading, and those with qualifying quantities equivalent to ‘toxic’ are shown by the light blue shading. Examples of how substances would change scope are:• Some substances that are currently classified as very toxic (T+) (oral and inhalation of aerosol exposure routes) will become GHS category 2 and given larger qualifying quantities than they had previously. Their contribution to whether a site was top-tier, lower tier or out of scope of Seveso would therefore be reduced.• Substances that are GHS category 3 by the inhalation of vapour route are currently classified as harmful (Xn) but will be newly included in Seveso III. These substances could increase the COMAH status of relevant sites.

Comparison of current EU classification system with GHS classification for acute toxicity

A challenge for industry and the regulator is that available data to determine the GHS categories of substances is currently incomplete. This is expected to gradually improve as more substances are notified under REACH. In the meantime, companies may find it difficult to obtain all the data necessary to determine the effect that Seveso III will have on them. HSL offers a service to HSE and industry to source toxicity data from suitable databases, determine the GHS category of substances, where necessary, and, if required, to assist with the COMAH aggregation to determine the effect for the site. This could be used for the full range of substances held on site, or could focus on particular substances which had already been identified as being of critical importance to the COMAH status. HSL also runs a training course (COMAH: the Seveso III Directive and GHS) that describes the main Seveso III changes and explains how you can determine GHS categories and whether your site will change its COMAH status. This is part of a suite of COMAH training courses.

Any sites brought newly into COMAH, or moving from lower tier to top tier may be interested in HSL’s COMAH consultancy service. We are able to provide advice based on our long-standing experience of COMAH. For example, a lower tier COMAH site that was considering moving to top tier found it very helpful to discuss its process safety management system with an HSL consultant who was formerly an HSE COMAH inspector. In addition, advice on the application of the COMAH aggregation rule helped the company to determine that it was possible to remain at lower tier.

We hope you enjoy the conference and look forward to talking with you at the HSL exhibition stand. Further details are available from: Jill Wilday: phone 01298 218124 email [email protected]

© Crown copyright 2012


Safety Climate ToolConcerned health and safety procedures aren't being followed within your organisation? Want to engageyour workforce and improve your safety culture?

The Safety Climate Tool offers a unique insight into the safety

culture of your organisation and the steps needed to improve it.

Through a series of tailored questions, measure the perceptions

of your workforce to health and safety issues, allowing you to

focus valuable resource where it will be most effective.

T : +44 (0)1298 218356E : [email protected]: www.safetyclimatetool.co.uk

n Determining the GHS category of substances

n Assistance with COMAH aggregation

n Consultancy for issues with COMAH

n Training courses

n Mapping (for example maps for summary safety reports and

population data).

The Health and Safety Laboratory

Seveso III: How HSL can helpHSL offers several services to help your company

with the changes to Seveso III, including:

For further information contact: Claire Bailey, GHS category service: T: +44 (0)1298 218427, E: [email protected]

Neal Parton, general COMAH services: T: +44 (0)1298 218408, E: [email protected]

Training and ConferencesHSL has been leading the way in health and safety since 1911 and our

expertise in the field is internationally recognised. What makes our health and

safety training different to many other course providers is the scientists and safety

experts who deliver the training. They are not only trainers; they are

specialists working daily in research and incident investigation. Our aim is to

ensure all your training needs are met in full.

If you would like further advice or information, please call us on T: +44 (0)1298 218806 or email [email protected]. View our full course list at www.hsl.gov.uk/training

Health & Safety LaboratoryAn agency of the Health & Safety Executive

T: +44 (0) 1298 218218E: [email protected]

HSL was originally set up to minimise risks to people's health and safety at work. Today, with a century's experience, investment and growth under our belt, the scope of our work is unparalleled -and ever-widening. So, as well as continuing to support HSE, we now work with a wide range of otherpublic and private sector organisations, often conducting detailed, bespoke research and development work on their behalf.

Our organisation brings together some of the most informed, level-headed thinkers in the country, from microbiologists and explosives experts to occupational psychologists and engineers. It's our unique level of technical expertise and breadth of knowledge which has earned us our international reputation as a centre of excellence for health and safety.

HSL’s point of viewWithin any organisation there are four key elements to be considered when looking to optimise performance, be it health andsafety performance, operational performance, financial performance etc. These four elements are:

What we do for our clientsWe help our clients improve their business by increasing productivity, protecting their staff and clients, protecting their assets toprevent catastrophe, and improving their supply chain. This in turn protects reputation and ensures best practice. We help clientsacross a broad range of sectors including aerospace, oil and gas, power industries (including nuclear), manufacturing, transportand healthcare.

An introduction toThe Health and Safety Laboratory

People: The core skills & behaviours running through every aspect of an organisation

Plant: Equipment, facilities & infrastructure

Process: How plant & people operate and interact with each other

Place: Geographic and / or cultural environment

PEOPLE

PLANT

PROCESS

PLACE

Health & Safety Laboratory www.hsl.gov.uk

To find out how we can help you, contact us or visit our website www.hsl.gov.uk

Health and Safety LaboratoryHarpur HillBuxtonDerbyshire SK17 9JNUK


Shulmans is a full-service commercial law firm, which understands the challenges affecting the chemicals and

manufacturing sectors.

We advise on risk management and supply chain issues, and

provide support in the event of an incident, including an out-of-hours emergency contact service.

We offer training on a range of legal topics.

Elaflex rubber speciality

hoses for the chemical and

pharmaceutical industry.

For more informationwww.elaflex.co.uk

[email protected] 452 950

Richard Alan GroupRichard Alan House

Shaw Cross Business ParkOwl LaneDewsburyWF12 7RD

Contact – Kathy BradleyTel – 01924 467040

Enquiries: [email protected]: www.richardalangroup.co.uk

ARMS Reliability Engineers are the global training providers for the Apollo Root Cause Analysis Methodology and has been delivering courses throughout the world for the last 16 years both at public seminars and at client’s sites. They have also provided global facilitation/investigation services on some high profile incidents.

Gary Tyne 07543301341ARMS Reliability UK [email protected], www.globalreliability.comWest Yorkshire

Contacts: Mark Lumley0113 297 772707946 780989;

Lyn Dario0113 297 377907506 920367.

EXHIBITORS

Provide quality, innovation, value for money and excellent customer experience in:- ME + I Engineering- Site Maintenance- Project Management and Installations- Fabrications, Steelwork and PipeworkFully supported by a range of complementary services.

Deete +44(0)133eeeee99eeeeee +44(0)e075780100ttt.eeeteeeeeeeeee.eee

tee eeeeeeee teeeeeee eeeeeee:e chemsafe eeeee e eeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeee eeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeee e eeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeee eeeeeee eeeeee eeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeee e ee

eeeeeeee

eeeee ee eeeet ee fiee eee eteee eee Open courses eee in-house training!

LINK Associates InternationalSpecialists in Risk Managementetteteeee e teeteeteee tteeee teeeeee


Grimley Smith Associates is a multidiscipline

engineering consultancy providing comprehensive

engineering design and project management services to the

Energy, Chemical and Process Industries across the UK.

For more information contactPaul Lawrence onTel: +44 (0) 1652 601555E-mail: [email protected]: www.gsa.co.uk

l Electrostatic audits and risk assessments

l Safety management documentation including Explosion Protection Document (EPD) compilation

l Major Accident Hazards (Seveso II / COMAH)

l IEC 61508/61511 SIL Determination

l Occupied Buildings Assessment

l REACH and CLP

l Incident investigation and expert witness services

l Testing

l Fire and explosion properties testing

l Chemical reaction hazard assessment and testing

l Electrostatic properties testing

l Regulatory testing under REACH and CLP

l Instrumentation

l Fire and explosion testing equipment

l Electrostatic test equipment, including the world renowned Chilworth JCI range

l Notified body certification

l Behavioural safety

At Chilworth, process safety is not just a remote part of a wider portfolio of services that we offer - it is all we do! As we say, “you benefit if you contact us before an explosion rather than afterwards”.

To learn more about how your company can benefit from the experience and knowledge available at Chilworth.

Please contact our head office in Southampton on +44(0)23 8076 0722, email us on [email protected] or visit our website www.chilworth.co.uk

Yorkshire Chemical Focus Directory 11 Yorkshire Chemical Focus Directory

CHILWORTH TECHNOLOGY

INDEPENDENT PROCESS SAFETY SERVICES FROM CHILWORTHProcess safety deals with the hazards associated with the storage and processing of hazardous materials that, if inappropriately handled or processed, could cause inter-alia fires, explosions and/or toxic chemical release. Accidents or incidents of these types have the potential for multiple fatalities and injuries both on and off-site, accompanied by major environmental damage.

The resulting economic impact, combined with the social impact arising from such an event, can threaten a company’s reputation and commercial viability. Prevention of incidents and mitigating the effects of accidents, can only be achieved if a company has an effective process safety management (PSM) system and the culture to support it.

People – at all levels from the CEO to shopfloor workers – are essential components of any approach to process safety, and it is these human factors that have a strong influence on process safety management. The impact of people’s behaviour and communications – whether positive or negative – on the process safety management system is known as the process safety culture. In order to maintain a high standard of process safety management, it is vital that an organisation has a good process safety culture.

Based in the UK, Chilworth is part of DEKRA, one of the largest specialised process safety organisations in the world, providing independent consulting, training and testing and offering global expertise with a local presence in explosion and process safety.

With an internationally recognised reputation in process safety, Chilworth has completed projects in a wide variety of countries around the world. Using highly qualified staff, we join with our business partners in the successful development and delivery of sustained improvement in process safety performance, emulating and leading best practice.

As an expert process safety company, Chilworth provided one of only two technical process safety experts to the Baker Panel investigating the Texas City refinery blast. Chilworth, therefore, has both experience and expertise to provide effective process safety support through first hand knowledge of the technologies and processes involved.

Working with a number of multi-site blue chip clients in a variety of processing industries, we operate in the petrochemical, chemical, pharmaceutical, food, drink, paper and packaging, plastics and rubber, agrochemical and power generation sectors. With consultants operating from locations in Europe, Asia and North America, Chilworth is ideally placed to provide a harmonised global approach to process safety for our UK and multi-national customer base.

Chilworth, therefore, offers a comprehensive range of services including:

l Consultancy and Training

l Process Safety Management (PSM) Systems

l Process Safety Culture

l Risk Based Process Safety (RBPS)

l Hazard Identification Studies (including HAzOP)

l ATEX/DSEAR compliance assessments (including mechanical and electrical equipment compliance and Hazardous Area Classification (HAC)

CDR Pumps are a leading manufacturer of centrifugal and Air pumps for the handling of toxic, corrosive and flammable chemicals in the Chemical, Pharmaceutical and Nuclear industries.

Manufacturing in materials including Polypropylene, PVDF, PFA lining, ETFE, Stainless Steel and exotic alloys to handle safely and efficiently, liquids used in modern manufacturing processes.

For more information:

Ashley FennTel: 01933 674777Web: www.cdrpumps.co.ukEmail: [email protected]

EXHIBITORS

G4S is a leading provider of safety and security services to the chemical sector. Let us work with you to design the most effective solution to meet your site specific needs.

For more information:Telephone: 0800 085 9889 Email: [email protected] Website: www.g4s.com/uk


Elaflex rubber speciality hoses for the chemical and pharmaceutical industry.

Smooth true bore of extruded construction. Technically advanced with anti static properties and marked to the latest EN standards. Lightweight and easy to work with and remain flexible after many years of use.

Special liners ensure Elaflex is synonymous with “safety first”. Our FEP/UPE lined hoses are FDA acceptable and extensively used within industry. Our hoses also meet the requirements of “A” and or “B” as in the FDA schedule also providing if required for lapped lining.

Elaflex offer hose inspection as well as pressure testing on site by our trained personnel trained to ADR standard as well as HGV licensed.

Our range of rubber bellows come with tie bars, PTFE linings, vacuum rings and in a variety of flange drillings.

On show Mann Tek dry break couplings, ZVA Nozzles, safety break couplings FEP hoses, Fluorflex hose, UTL hoses.

For more information : www.elaflex.co.uk [email protected] 01992 452 950

Working towards safe and compliant solutions for the chemical and process industries

HFL Risk Services is renowned within the chemical and process industries as being a specialist in Process Safety Management and Loss Prevention. Our established team of industry experts and business improvement practitioners has helped hundreds of companies to achieve their goal of operating in a safe, compliant and efficient manner.

All our services are tailored for your organisation to ensure that they are appropriate and proportionate to the risks you have. Our complete range of services covers:

> Process Safety Management and Leadership> Safety Management Systems development,

implementation and review> Benchmarking and assessment using

our own in-house tool – INSIGHT Lifecycle®

> COMAH Safety Reports> Environmental Services including

Environmental Permitting> DSEAR compliance> REACH> HAZID & HAZOP> LOPA & SIL Determination

> Human Factors> Fire and explosion modelling> Air dispersion modelling> Consequence and frequency assessment> Occupied Buildings Risk Assessment> Fire Risk Assessment> Asset Integrity Management> Functional Safety> Process Safety Performance Indicators> Auditing Services> Training and Competence> Liaison with regulatory bodies

COMPLIANCE RISK ASSESSMENT RISK MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT

For more information, please contact Sarah Grindrod on 0161 304 5902 or email sales @hfl risk.com

www.hfl risk.com

MTAC0080 HFL Advert 125x176 AW.indd 1 11/5/12 15:06:58SevesoIII Official Guide.indd 22 05/10/2012 12:22:59

Working towards safe and compliant solutions for the chemical and process industries

HFL Risk Services is renowned within the chemical and process industries as being a specialist in Process Safety Management and Loss Prevention. Our established team of industry experts and business improvement practitioners has helped hundreds of companies to achieve their goal of operating in a safe, compliant and efficient manner.

All our services are tailored for your organisation to ensure that they are appropriate and proportionate to the risks you have. Our complete range of services covers:

> Process Safety Management and Leadership> Safety Management Systems development,

implementation and review> Benchmarking and assessment using

our own in-house tool – INSIGHT Lifecycle®

> COMAH Safety Reports> Environmental Services including

Environmental Permitting> DSEAR compliance> REACH> HAZID & HAZOP> LOPA & SIL Determination

> Human Factors> Fire and explosion modelling> Air dispersion modelling> Consequence and frequency assessment> Occupied Buildings Risk Assessment> Fire Risk Assessment> Asset Integrity Management> Functional Safety> Process Safety Performance Indicators> Auditing Services> Training and Competence> Liaison with regulatory bodies

COMPLIANCE RISK ASSESSMENT RISK MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT

For more information, please contact Sarah Grindrod on 0161 304 5902 or email sales @hfl risk.com

www.hfl risk.com

MTAC0080 HFL Advert 125x176 AW.indd 1 11/5/12 15:06:58SevesoIII Official Guide.indd 23 05/10/2012 12:23:00

www.hsl .gov.uk www.ycf .org.uk

HSL + YCF Joint Event

Certificate of Attendance

This certificate is awarded to

Who has attended the:Seveso III: Are you prepared?

18th October 2012


YCF Events Brochure

Documents

Transcript of YCF Events Brochure