Withdrawal of BS 5973:1993

BS 5973, BS EN 12811-1:2003 versus Legislation

I believe that between the members of the Scaffolders Forum there is a pool of extensive knowledge and experience of scaffolding that it places them at the forefront of the industry. The amount of knowledge and experience of those members makes the Forum a formidable force to be reckond with.

British Standards are produced for voluntary use only and in themselves have no regulatory status, unless mandated by British or European regulations, although they may support UK legislation and regulation such as The Working at Height Regulations 2005 Regulation,

An example of this is Regulation 7 (2) of The Working at Height Regulations 2005

“An employer shall select work equipment for work at height which –
(a) has the characteristics including dimensions which –

(i) are appropriate to the nature of the work to be performed and for
foreseeable loadings; and

(ii) allow passage without risk; and

(b) is in other respects the most suitable work equipment”.


The regulations are quite explicit about what has to be accomplished, but not how.

Take (i) for instance

“Characteristics including dimensions which are appropriate to the nature of the
work to be performed and for the foreseeable loading”.

It would be impossible to comply with this regulation without having some sort of guidance, and this is where the (BS) British Standard and (EN) European Normalisation come into play.

For information and guidance for “dimensions and foreseeable loading” we would now look at

BS EN 12811-1:2003 TEMPORARY WORKS EQUIPMENT – Part 1:
Scaffolds – Performance requirements and general design.

Clause 6 Requirements for structural design

6.1 Basic requirements

6.1.1 General

‘Each working scaffold shall be designed, constructed and maintained to ensure that it does not collapse or move unintentionally and so that it can be used safely. This applies at all stages, including erection, modification and until fully dismantled’.

Before the introduction of BS EN 12811-1:2003 we used BS 5973 as follows:

BS 5973 (withdrawn June 2004) Section 2. Standard scaffolds – 8.5.1 General ‘Unsheeted access and working scaffolds may be constructed up to a height of 50 m without calculations’

Tie tables in accordance with BS 5973 were in accordance with table 1(a) Unsheeted independent tied scaffolds with non-movable ties the frequency was every 40 square metres.

The effects of horizontal lateral load specified in BS EN 12811-1:2003 means that tie assemblies will normally need to be designed for tension as well as horizontal shear. As a rule of thumb tie frequency should not exceed 16 square metres (every two lifts and every two bays) 4 metres maximum vertically and horizontally.

Therefore to comply with Regulation 7 of the Working at Height Regulations 2005 we would need to be working in accordance with BS EN 12811-1:2003

Should an incident occur with the scaffolding and it was discovered that we had been working to the superseded sections of BS 5973 and not to BS EN 12811 then a prosecution may follow.

But of course it may not end there because your insurance company may infer that because you have failed to carry out you work in accordance with the WAH Regulations 2005 you may have committed a criminal offence resulting in your insurance being null and void.

It is so important that the HSE Infoline provide the correct information and not tell us something that if we followed could result in a criminal prosecution.
 
Ken, It seems to be a legal minefield, catch 22, your dammed if you do, or dammed if you dont, By the failure to provide clarity they have inadvertenly set up a potential battlefield in a court of law if anything goes wrong. It's so worded in the interest of the insurance industry and the legal proffesion that they wont be able to stand over their own reccomendations, the only losers are going to be the scaffold companies even if they have followed the reccomendations.
 
Andy,

My insurance company have stated that should I be successfully prosecuted by the HSE for breach of the Working at Height Regulations 2005 then my general accident insurance policy becomes null and void and this is because technically I would have been found guilty of a criminal offence, and it is the policy of insurance companies not to reward criminals.

Ken Cain
 
The only people that will be delighted to hear of this anomaly is the insurance companies that will drop you as soon as look at you.
 
Insurance companies

They will take your money first, then let you down when you need them most.
 
Tie Tags

Scafftag do a tag for ties. Test date, Load test.
Brandy you are bang on. We do two Tie tag versions - a simple warning tag to indicate that it is a tie and shouldn't be removed and another which indicates that it is a tie which has been tested and shows the test results. We have an update due out shortly which is even better. If you want some samples let me know.
 

Attachments

  • misc111_tie_tag_265px_1.gif
    misc111_tie_tag_265px_1.gif
    17.9 KB · Views: 8
  • misc112_tie_tag_265px.jpg
    misc112_tie_tag_265px.jpg
    8.1 KB · Views: 7
Top Bottom