Risk-assessment advice

[numbersix]

Noticed two guys refueling a Legend in Donington’s paddock, using a 5 gal jerry can and a funnel. Couldn’t see any fire extinguisher. The nearest was 30 yds away inside the Park Ferme cage.
Having seen the disturbing effects of a few gallons going off big time during the excellent training sessions at Donny, I stood back a bit, then suddenly realised there was a small boy sitting in the driver’s seat with the doors shut and no obvious way of opening them (turns out to be a glorified garden gate bolt inside the door).
My risk assessment was that the chance of the fuel going up was quite low (I’ve never heard of a paddock fire yet, no doubt others have), but the results would have been catastrophic had it done so.
In the end nothing happened, and I said nothing, but realise I should have, even at the risk of sounding over-officious.
Any advice on what I should have done or said for future occurences would be welcome.

[stroller]

Quite right for your concern.

In this day of Health & Safety issues, it only needs an incident to happen (as was the potential one you described) and the Powers that be will be down on the Circuits & Clubs like a ton of bricks.

That would lead to more legislation/rules/regulations = expense for all concerned.

If you are worried about "poking your nose in" a quick word with the Chief Paddock Marshal may have helped.

[GTRMagic]

Its funny, fire doesnt seem to care whether its an F1 car you are fuelling or a club racer... there are no boundaries....

I can recall watching a car being refilled in a paddock the same way, the fuel guy (the driver) was in his race suit, unzipped to the waist and the arms tied round his middle, and the thing splashed fuel (an airlock presumably) in a big way... all over his race suit....

It took a lot of convincing by his team to scratch from the race because his race suit was drowned in Mr Shell's finest.....

[chezza]

Originally Posted by stroller

If you are worried about "poking your nose in" a quick word with the Chief Paddock Marshal may have helped.

Thats if you can find one...I haven't seen a paddock marshal since I have been marshalling...ok only 3 years but!

[Tim Falce]

OK, since this has been brought up, how are we supposed to refuel then? This is a genuine question and any advice may be noted.

[stroller]

No problems with refueling providing suitable precautions are taken.

The point of the post being the worry about the boy in the car!!

Even, I believe, in International Sportscar Racing with all the safety measures in place - no driver is allowed in the car while refueling is taking place.

[Garry Holmes]

What safety precautions do you take in a petrol station????

[stroller]

Extinguishers are at hand

No smoking or naked lights

No mobile phones

You are not filling from containers into an open funnel!!!

[MagnetON]

Originally Posted by Garry Holmes

What safety precautions do you take in a petrol station????

In a petrol station the fuel is dispensed from the pump through a fire-retardand armoured hose into a nozzle which is inserted in the fuel inlet, so the petrol is virtually going straight into the tank, it's not going into an open funnel where it can give off nice amounts of vapour or splash everywhere while it's going in.

Open funnels also don't have any mechanism to stop the petrol flow when the tank is full or when there's back-pressure. Jerry cans also don't have much of a mechanism to prevent spilage if they are dropped.

Petrol stations also usually have several fire extinguishers mounted within relatively easy reach for if there is a problem.

[numbersix]

The leg-end in question has its fuel tank in the boot and the two guys were re-adjusting the funnel constantly to stop the fuel "glugging" and dripping into the boot cavity. Don't know if there are wires or electrics in that area. I hoped not.
The car has no window glass and precious little in the way of a bulkhead, so a spark would have engulfed both the pourers and the kid.
The kid should not have been in the car at that time and ideally a third person with a powder bottle should have been present. Or at least the bottle, I thought.

[Garry Holmes]

"Adequate" Fire extinguishers are at hand in the paddock - in the same way there are "adequate" marshals on the circuit.

[scorch]

I think you are correct to ask them to consider the way they refuel.

Don't forget that you could be responsible if an injury is caused either through your action or inaction. so if the car did go up and they had evidence that you thought it was dangerious they could have you charged for non action...

Isn't health and safety fun..

[stroller]

"Adequate" Fire extinguishers are at hand in the paddock - in the same way there are "adequate" marshals on the circuit.



Sorry Garry - don't see your point??

[Piglet]

Originally Posted by scorch

Don't forget that you could be responsible if an injury is caused either through your action or inaction. so if the car did go up and they had evidence that you thought it was dangerious they could have you charged for non action...

There is no requirement under English law that forces a bystander to take action in the way that you suggest.

As a general point, refuelling in the paddock is I believe covered under circuit standing regulations and is often covered in final instructions for the meeting.

[Woolley]

The discussion is generally suggesting that refuelling needs looking at, but to be honest I don't see any need for that, or any way of enforcing further regulation if it occurred. Fuel is just one of many hazardous substances around the paddock and you would hope that people using them take sensible precautions. In this case I would have considered suggesting no-one being inside the car while it is being refuelled, small boy or otherwise.

[numbersix]

My point was what should I say if someone is being less than sensible about safety without appearing to be a stupid old pedant and by association, lowering the world's opinion of marshals. I was seeking advice on how to best approach such situations diplomatically.

Personally I think that drivers should be obliged to attend a fire-fighting demo. I think the two defining moments of my marshalling career were seeing what just a couple of gallons did to an old Fiesta (I felt the blast 30 feet away) and how useless AFFF is in fighting a petrol fire as a first line of attack. The seriously expensive Donny Jag Fire Tender couldn't put out said fire with 80 gallons of AFFF. Yet a squirt of powder did.
Fascinating and very scary.

[Tim Falce]

Originally Posted by Garry Holmes

What safety precautions do you take in a petrol station????

I always make sure that if I am smoking I hold my cigarette up high because the petrol vapour will fall to the lowest point possible and if I splash my hands or clothes with petrol I always light my ciggies outside the car

[Andrew Hornsey]

Originally Posted by Piglet

There is no requirement under English law that forces a bystander to take action in the way that you suggest.

As a general point, refuelling in the paddock is I believe covered under circuit standing regulations and is often covered in final instructions for the meeting.

Piglet,

As a marshal covering the event, you are no longer an interested bystander, but working as part of the organising team. As such, you could be considered for prosicution under the H&S@W act.

Differing authorities will have slightly different views on the matter, but that is the view of my local EHO.

Andrew

[numbersix]

Originally Posted by Andrew Hornsey

Piglet,

As a marshal covering the event, you are no longer an interested bystander, but working as part of the organising team. As such, you could be considered for prosicution under the H&S@W act.

Differing authorities will have slightly different views on the matter, but that is the view of my local EHO.

Andrew

What about the general disclaimer on tickets and programmes where we will not be held responsible?

[Hepatic]

I've been trawlling the 'net and can't find much on refuelling regs for legends. The only safety bits i found were that refuelling must be carried out in an open area and not near sources of ignition (doh!). As the car was parked in the paddock, having a small child in the car would be allowed, but anyone with half a brain can see the possible problems that may cause whilst refuelling.

Common sense would say don't have kids near it and have an extinguisher close by, but not everyone has some of that. Regulation wise they don't seem to have done anything wrong...

[Tracey]

If I had been in that situation, I might have just had a quiet word and raised my concerns, at least that way, my conscience would be clear, and I would have got the people involved thinking about what they are doing.

[Piglet]

Originally Posted by Andrew Hornsey

Piglet,

As a marshal covering the event, you are no longer an interested bystander, but working as part of the organising team. As such, you could be considered for prosicution under the H&S@W act.

Differing authorities will have slightly different views on the matter, but that is the view of my local EHO.

Andrew

Andrew,

we've had this discussion before and your comments of this type always provoke a degree of concern amongst marshals.

As a lawyer, I cannot see that there will every be a situation where a marshal walking across a paddock will be prosecuted in this situation. I appreciate your interpretation of your local Environmental Health Officer's comments but IMO (and it was my disertation subject) it is incorrect in this scenario.

[Sheila M]

Originally Posted by falcemob

OK, since this has been brought up, how are we supposed to refuel then? This is a genuine question and any advice may be noted.

My favourite book at bedtime has all the answers falcemob!

Seriously, I have looked at "Refuelling" in Section J of the Blue Book and the clause I found states:

"14. Pit and Paddock Regulations

14.2.1 Refuelling and work upon the cars other than by a driver or officials may be carried out only at the pits or paddock ....

14.2.2 A driver shall vacate the car and the engine be stopped throughout any refuelling operation. In addition the entrant shall ensure that throughout refuelling one person shall stand by the car with a fire extinguisher at the ready. Any personnel refuelling the vehicle or on stand by with a fire extinguisher during a pit stop must wear a safety suit in accordance with Q.9".

My interpretation of this is that during ANY refuelling operation, whether it be in the pits (where permitted by supplementary regulations) or in the paddock, there should be someone standing by with a fire extinguisher and no-one should be in the vehicle, which should have its engine switched off.

The reference to the safety suit, I believe, only refers to permitted refuelling during pit stops and not to any other form of refuelling.

The problem with refuelling in the paddock, of course, is that in these days of dwindling marshalling numbers, paddock marshals are a rare breed and policing refuelling in the paddock is becoming increasingly more difficult.

From a personal point of view, I have seen accidents happen during refuelling and would prefer people to exercise a small amount of common sense whilst doing so.

Hope this helps in some way.

Sheila

[Andrew Hornsey]

Originally Posted by Piglet

Andrew,

we've had this discussion before and your comments of this type always provoke a degree of concern amongst marshals.

As a lawyer, I cannot see that there will every be a situation where a marshal walking across a paddock will be prosecuted in this situation. I appreciate your interpretation of your local Environmental Health Officer's comments but IMO (and it was my disertation subject) it is incorrect in this scenario.

Piglet,

As someone that has been involved in litigation on the personal accident front, I have seen first hand the lengths some will go to to get the maximum possible. This would not normally affect marshals, because most of us are not wealthy enough to be worth chasing (Although with house prices the way they are, who knows!). In the event of a PA claim, the approach now seems to be joint and several. Imagine if the marshal was a millionaire - it could result in a claim against them as well as the circuits/clubs. Recent cases have shown that in cases where the claimant was partially responsible, the judge will tend to find in favour of the injured party.

With regards to the EHO, this is not my opinion on comments that were made, but a statement of fact made by the EHO when I asked her the question of whether or not she would consider prosecuting a marshal under Health and Safety legislation.

Her reply was that that if it could be proved the marshal acted outside of best practice, or company/sporting regulations, and that the marshal had been trained in the relevant subject, that she WOULD prosecute. She stated that it would not matter if this was an MSA sanctioned event or not.

This is not just my opinion, but also that of a collegue that is involved in motorsport litigation.

I do not want to get into an argument, but this is from DIRECT experience, and not guesswork. Feel free to PM me if you have any questions or want to pass on any relevant info to show me that I have been told something incorrectly by the EHO.

Andrew

[numbersix]

Surely, every spectator or participant has accepted the rules of the venue as outlined in the "Motorsport is dangerous" paragraphs on tickets and in the programme, and as such have tacitly agreed not to hold anyone responsible for anything. Therefore they cannot sue, or am I being naive?
Perhaps this is worth a new thread.