Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to a newer version or another browser.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

Bam Nuttall prosecuted for poisoning workers

Bam Nuttall and a steel fabricator have been fined for exposing workers to lead during refurbishment work on the Nab Tower in the Solent.

Russell Leggett and Robert Peach required hospital treatment after inhaling dust and fumes when steel coated in lead paint was cut into and removed from the structure in July 2013.

Blood tests showed traces of lead far exceeded safe levels – and was almost double the acceptable standard in Russell’s case.

Both workers required intensive treatment and months of monitoring before their blood tests returned to safe levels.

Nab Tower

The Nab Tower was built for anti-submarine protection in The Solent during World War I.

Bam Nuttall and Four Tees Engineering were prosecuted after an investigation by the Health and Safety Executive identified failings with control measures surrounding the steel cutting work.

Portsmouth Crown Court heard that Bam Nuttall was responsible for a project to remove weathered steel from the Nab Tower, a former military control installation that has become an important beacon for captains navigating the busy waters around the Isle of Wight and the Solent.

The work involved removing sections of steel using industrial torches, a job that was sub-contracted to Four Tees, with workers from both companies involved.

Despite knowing the steel was coated in lead paint, Bam failed to apply this knowledge and assess the need for control measures against lead exposure.

HSE established that Four Tees was equally culpable because it too overlooked suitable control measures, and also failed to ensure its employees had suitable medical surveillance whilst working with a potentially harmful substance, which can permanently damage vital nerves and organs.

Inspectors concluded there was little in place to stop the spread of lead dust and contamination.

Russell and Robert, whose blood tested positive, were both employed by Four Tees. Robert had a reading of 97 and Russell 110 against a safe level of 60.

Three Bam Nuttall workers were also exposed and put at risk, although their tests proved inconclusive.

After the incident, strict rules were implemented to create ‘clean’ and ‘dirty’ areas where decontamination was required before transferring from one to the other. Workers were also given better face masks and regular medical surveillance.busine

Bam Nuttall was fined a total of £56,000 and ordered to pay £6,165 in costs after pleading guilty to breaching Sections 2(1) and 3 of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 and two breaches of the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1992.

Four Tees Engineering was fined £14,000 with £2,081 costs for single breaches  of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act and Control of Lead at Work Regulations 2002.

HSE inspector Andrew Moore said: “The Nab Tower exposure was serious, and demonstrates the need to properly assess and guard against potential inhalation of lead fumes and dust. “The paint coating the steel was known to contain lead and it should have been handled with care from day one. Instead both companies allowed a number of unsafe practices, including eating, drinking and smoking, to continue unchallenged at the site that fuelled potential contamination.

“Not that the workers would have known because there was no surveillance in place to monitor levels of lead in their blood and flag when the exposure had occurred.

“Duty holders should always err on the side of caution when cutting, stripping or grinding painted material and assume it contains lead unless there is good evidence to prove otherwise. That means having adequate decontamination, surveillance and other control measures in place.”

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions. Please note comments made online may also be published in the print edition of New Civil Engineer. Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.