Fined despite safety policy being 'robust on paper'

BAE Systems Land Systems (Munitions and Ordnance) Ltd was fined £50,000 and ordered to pay costs of £15,000 at Cardiff Crown Court after a worker was severely burnt at its site in Glascoed, Monmouthshire. The company was found to have breached parts of the Health & Safety at Work etc. Act 1974.

The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) said the case should serve as a reminder to business and other organisations to make sure their workforce followed approved safety procedures.

The court heard how 21-year-old Ryan White was engaged in the process of destroying pyrotechnic composition in August 2004 when it ignited, resulting in severe burns to his face, neck and both arms.

A subsequent HSE investigation found that the disposal procedures being used at the time of the incident did not comply with BAE's own approved control procedures, and that management and supervision of the procedure was "inadequate".

The HSE also found that an accreditation process of ensuring operatives followed disposal procedures whilst destroying the material also failed to follow company policy, and the composition did not comply with the company's approved specification.

Policy followed?

HSE inspector, David Norman, said it was a "clear case of a company having written policies and procedures in place but clearly failing to ensure that they were implemented correctly".

He explained: "The materials involved here were classed as very sensitive and required controlled measures to be implemented during disposal. The risk assessment conducted by the company had identified that the composition should have been desensitised prior to burning and that the maximum quantity to be burnt at any one time was limited.

"The investigation found that the composition was burnt dry in a quantity far greater than that allowed by the procedure. Training consisted of shadowing a senior operative and reading of the procedures, however no one in the management chain ensured that this company policy was followed."

Mr Norman added: "Overall, the preventive measures taken by the company to ensure the safe disposal of pyrotechnic composition were ineffective; this lead to poor communication and misunderstanding within the disposal area even though the risk assessment appeared to be robust on paper."