WM Morrison Supermarkets plc - Petrol Filling Stations Delivery Procedures

Regulatory Reform Fire Safety Order 2005

A Cambridge-based paramedic has launched a national campaign with Vodafone to encourage people to store emergency contact details in their mobile phones.

Bob Brotchie, a clinical team leader for the East Anglian Ambulance NHS Trust, hatched the plan last year after struggling to get contact details from shocked or injured patients.

By entering the acronym ICE – for In Case of Emergency – into the mobile’s phone book, users can log the name and number of someone who should be contacted in an emergency.

The idea follows research carried out by Vodafone that shows more than 75 per cent of people carry no details of who they would like telephoned following a serious accident. Bob, 41, who has been a paramedic for 13 years, said: “I was reflecting on some of the calls I’ve attended at the roadside where I had to look through the mobile phone contacts struggling for information on a shocked or injured person. “It’s difficult to know who to call. Someone might have “mum” in their phone book but that doesn’t mean they’d want them contacted in an emergency. “Almost everyone carries a mobile phone now, and with ICE we’d know immediately who to contact and what number to ring. The person may even know of their medical history.”

The campaign was launched this week by Bob and Falklands war hero Simon Weston in association with Vodafone’s annual Life Savers Awards. Vodafone spokesperson Ally Stevens said: “The Life Savers Awards already demonstrate, through practical example, the important role a mobile phone can play when minutes matter in an emergency. “By adopting the ICE advice, your mobile will now also help the rescue services quickly contact a friend or relative – which could be vital in a life or death situation.”

The campaign is also asking people to think carefully about who will be their ICE partner - with helpful advice on who to choose - particularly if that person has to give consent for emergency medical treatment.

Bob hopes that all emergency services will promote ICE in their area as part of a national awareness campaign to highlight the importance of carrying next of kin details at all times. He said the idea was for the benefit of loved ones as well as the patient. “Research suggests people recover quicker from the psychological effects of their loved one being hurt if they are involved at an earlier stage and they can reach them quickly," he added. He said he hoped mobile phone companies would now build the ICE contact into future models, adding: "It's not a difficult thing to do. As many people say they carry mobile phones in case of an emergency, it seems natural this information should be kept there."

Statutory Instrument S.I. 2005/1541 THE Regulatory Reform Fire Safety Order 2005 passed on 7 June 2005 and has the aim of simplifying the law regarding fire safety in the UK. The Regulations will be coming into effect on 6th April 2006. The Order imposes duties upon “responsible persons” (which is defined in Section 3) to take necessary general fire precautions to ensure the safety of employees and the general public in non-domestic premises.

In addition, the responsible person is required to undertake suitable and adequate risk assessment exercises for the purposes of identifying the necessary general fire precautions.

Regarding dangerous substances, risk assessments must take into consideration issues identified in Part 1 of Schedule 1, with the added requirement of eliminating or reducing the risk from the dangerous substances as far as reasonably practicable (Section 12). Part 2 of Schedule 1 deals with issues relating to risk assessments when young persons are employed on the premises.

Preventative and protective measures implemented should be done so on the basis of specified principles (Part 3 of Schedule 1). Records should be kept in relation to risk assessments undertaken and the protective measures taken.

Appropriate fire-fighting equipment and fire detection and alarms should be provided, where necessary (Section 13). Routes to emergency exits should be kept clear at all times (Section 14). Section 14 also details other specific issues regarding the emergency routes.

Appropriate safety procedures should be established for use in the event of serious and imminent dangers to occupiers (Section 15), and additional emergency measures may be required in respect of dangerous substances (Section 16).

The premises, its facilities, equipment and devices should be adequately maintained so that they are kept in efficient working order and in good repair (Section 17).

Responsible persons must appoint 1 or more competent persons to assist in the undertaking of preventative and protective measures (Section 18). Employees should also be provided with comprehensible and relevant information relating to, amongst other things, particular risks identified and safety procedures (Section 19). Adequate safety training should be provided to new and existing employees, where a new risk is identified (Section 21).

Co-operation between 2 or more persons responsible for the duties under the Order may be required to ensure jointly compliance (Section 22). Employees have general duties regarding their own reasonable safety and the safety of other employees (Section 23).

The Order also has provisions regarding safety measures relating to fire-fighter’s switches to luminous signs (Section 37), the necessity of maintenance measures for licensed premises (Sections 42-43). The reform repeals the Fire Precautions Act 1971 and amends or removes wherever possible the many other provisions dealing with fire safety contained in other legislation.

By Jamie Thompson

For Project engineers and construction companies to implement the same design and the same methods of construction and installation, using the same equipment on petrol filling stations across Europe still remains difficult - but believe it or not it is now far easier than it was a decade ago!

The oil industry in the past often complained about the differing regulations in some parts of Europe. For example the construction of a canopy differed tremendously between Germany and the UK, and tank construction and installation used to be governed and regulated by different national standards. (The UK after all was the only European country that used to insist on surrounding tanks with concrete!)

The selection and installation of equipment also proved difficult as manufacturers had to seek the individual approval of each country into which their systems were to be installed. This obviously added significant expense to their development costs and could prove unnecessarily time consuming.

I once recall trying to explain to an oil company engineer why the construction of a service station at one end of the Channel Tunnel cost far more than one on the other side! We know now that this was because we had to conform to different regulations as this was in the days before the European standards were written and adopted. It would be nice to see him once again now that I can report that this vision is closer to its goal.

On the UK’s entry into Europe, work had already started in the Technical Committees for both electrical (CENELEC) and technical standards (CEN) with the aim of producing common standards across Europe. The main objective behind this was to reduce or remove barriers to trade between countries and give equipment users confidence in the knowledge that these standards would equally apply throughout the whole of Europe.

In the field of Petrol Filling Stations work had started on a number of standards in the late 1980’s. A l t h o u g h progress was initially slow it has since speeded up as n a t i o n a l c o m m i t t e e s reached a better understanding of the European objectives and learned to produce standards more in line with the time frame first envisaged by the EU. When a new European standard is published all associated national standards are withdrawn and the new Standard applies throughout the whole of Europe.

The Standards

Drainage

Perhaps one of the first improvements seen in the UK saw was in forecourt drainage and much was learnt from Germany who had a different approach to oil water interceptors or “Separators” as they are now known. The three chamber interceptor which had traditionally been installed on many UK forecourts was

first designed around 1900 and while once adequate, it soon became apparent that as filling stations got larger the design could not cope with the flow rates, and as a consequence could not efficiently separate the oil/petrol in high flow situations.

A retention time of 6 minutes is necessary for the effluent to effectively separate the oil and water, therefore the units became larger, utilising just a single separating compartment. In addition coalescing filters improved performance of the separating technique and the standard included the need to provide automatic closure devices and warning alarms to safeguard the environment. However, some national traits still seems to exist when purchasing separators, with the Germans tending to use equipment constructed from concrete or steel, which are delivered in parts for assembly on site, whilst in the UK and France we tend to use single units constructed of GRP. The UK also has a preference to use larger oil capacity separators than some countries in order to accommodate accidental spillages, but essentially they are all constructed to the same standard EN 858-1 and EN 858-2 which refers to the selection of size, installation, operation and maintenance of separators.

Tanks Steel underground EN 12285-1 Personally, I believe that one of the most important single improvements in underground service station design was the development of the standard governing underground petrol tank construction. This standard had a difficult start as each country had their own national standard and each had its own ideas on construction methods. After initial difficulties the standard was produced with classes of tank, Germany had a preference for explosion proof tanks (subject to 10 bar pressure) while other countries did not. Common corrosion resistant coatings were agreed using products which could demonstrate excellent experience in underground use.

The application of the underground double wall steel tank across Europe was one of the most successful applications of a standard within this field and has been adopted by all the major users in Europe. The main advantage of this is that a double wall tanks with leak detection will prevent any fuel from leaking into the environment. programme because not enough interest was expressed to complete the work, and this is unfortunate.

Dispensers/Pumps EN 13167 – 1 2004

Steel Tanks Above ground EN 12285-2

This standard was completed in 2005.

Tanks GRP single wall below ground BS EN 976-1 & 2 and EN977 and EN978

This standard was one of the first completed and although the GRP tank is not now commonly used in European petrol stations, the standard has been published for those who may wish to use it. A draft for the double wall GRP tank has now been withdrawn from the

This is perhaps the standard that provides the manufacturer and purchaser the greatest freedom from local regulations or requirements. The dispenser standard is a safety standard but does not consider meter performance or vapour recovery efficiency. Apart from the performance requirements of parts of the dispenser it provides guidance on hazard areas, which will assist in dispenser design. This standard now replaces BS 7117 part 1 which has been withdrawn.

Automatic Nozzles EN 13012 2001

This standard was one of the first adopted in this series and covers the construction and performance of the piece of equipment the general public handles - the automatic nozzle