Hot News

FMCEC WARNING ON REVISED VIBRATION DIRECTIVE

A draft European directive on equipment operating conditions has been revived and could be rushed into law before the end of the year. The Finnish EU Presidency is pushing a slimmed down version of the 1993 Physical Agents Directive proposal which will concentrate on limiting the level of vibration experienced by plant operators. The two problems areas identified by the Commission are hand-arm vibration, which in extreme cases can cause arteries to close down and may result in the so-called "white finger" condition, and whole body vibration.

The FMCEC worry is that the proposed vibration limits may be both impossible to meet using current technology and impractical to measure given the vast range of applications of modern construction equipment. The danger for manufacturers is that even after costly and expensive vibration testing, it will be difficult to give users a firm guarantee that machines will meet the limits under all operating conditions.
If implemented, the Vibrations Directive will apply to machines as diverse as cars, trains and heavy goods vehicles. This prompted the Federation to alert other industries as well as plant users, represented by the Construction Plant-hire Association. In July, vibration expert Richard Stayner briefed FMCEC members on the ramifications of the Vibration Directive. Meetings have also been held with the HSE officials charged with drafting the Directive via the EU Social Questions Working Group. At the Federation's instigation, the Committee for European Construction Equipment (CECE) has set up a working group on this issue.

FMCEC Technical Secretary, David Monk comments, "if legislation is required in this area then we want to make sure it's practical. That is why we are mobilising our contacts to ensure that the proposals are properly scrutinised and receive meaningful technical input. We don't want this to be another case of hasty legislation resulting in un-enforceable regulations".

Next steps for the Federation is to study actual vibration levels of existing equipment in more detail whilst pressing the authorities to slow down the process to ensure proper technical scrutiny.

Briefing packs on the Vibration Directive are available free of charge to Members from David Monk at the FMCEC offices.

OEMS - IMPROVE YOUR IMAGE FOR FREE!

Tim Purbrick, The National Plant & Equipment Register's (TER) Insurance and Public Relations Manager, stated at a recent exclusive interview with the Editor that OEMs are able to register new construction equipment free of charge on the TER database. Some FMCEC members, such as JCB and New Holland, already register all their new machines but there are still a number of FMCEC companies who do not take advantage of this service.

Construction equipment is relatively safe, easy, target for thieves and in the past the recovery rate has been low. Recently cars have become more difficult to steal because of improved anti-theft measures such as electric door locking, dead locks and immobilises. For drug dealers and terrorists plant equipment has become more attractive to steal and much is stolen to order with a good percentage ending up in the former Soviet Bloc. It is relatively easy to steal construction equipment on a Friday night, load it onto a ferry and deliver it hundreds of miles away by Monday morning. There is a reported case of a group of thieves who asked for and got a police escort when transporting stolen plant equipment to the docks!

There is no doubt that the subject of plant theft will have increased coverage in the future (See "From the Council" section- Plant Theft Action Group) and the TER offer enables OEMs to make their products more attractive to customers at no cost. TER is increasingly used by Police forces in the UK and Ireland to check ownership of construction plant and equipment, tractors, agricultural machinery and trailers. Since its formation in 1995 TER has recovered over 770 items of equipment with a replacement value of over £8m. Registering new vehicles with TER has the following advantages for OEMs:

It shows customers that you care about your product and its after sales security.

TER have a reference point to identify the current owner without having to inconvenience your staff by asking for ownership details.

Registering your equipment with TER can form part of your publicity material.

TER can provide free stickers for your new equipment.

All that is required to register is the data held by your Warranty Department - make, model, generic descriptor, serial/engine/chassis/VIN, value, date of manufacture, colour, security devices fitted and customer address/contact details. This information should be supplied to TER by disc following the Electronic Transfer Specification, copies of which are available from TER. The vehicle and customer details will be entered into the TER confidential database which, Tim Purbrick pointed out, is for the exclusive use of TER's Investigators, the Police and law enforcement agencies in the UK and Ireland. Tim Purbrick said that some stolen construction equipment is broken for spares. It would make life much more difficult for criminals, and easier for the police and TER Investigators, if all the major components on construction equipment were hard stamped with its own serial number, in addition to the serial number plate, making identification easier. The chassis should also be hard stamped in a number of locations with serial/chassis number as this makes the criminal's job of disguising the machine's identity more difficult and greater chance of correctly identifying the machine when it is recovered. Tim Purbrick said that the OEM's should be encouraged to follow these guidelines because it reduces the requirement for TER Investigator's to ask for machine build specification sheets from OEMs, which are often required to identify expertly 'rung' machines. He said that TER would be happy to advise OEMs on suitable locations for the hard stamping their machines.

TER will start their service in the USA - as the National Equipment Register (NER) - in 1999 and plans to expand into France, Belgium and the Netherlands are being developed.

If any member requires a copy of the 1999 TER Annual Review then contact David Monk at the Secretariat or Tim Purbrick at TER, Bath & West Buildings, Lower Bristol Road, Bath, BA2 3EG, Tel: 01225 464599, Fax: 01225 317698, e-mail t.purbrick@lossmanagement.co.uk.

GOVERNMENT SPENDING PLANS 2001 - 2003

The Government will shortly commence the first review of public expenditure plans for the years 2001 - 2004. It is believed that the plans for the year 2001 - 2002 will be the same as those announced last year but the years 2002-2003 will be revised using recent data about the economy.

The Freight Transport Association (FTA) will be writing to the Government pointing out the low level of expenditure on transport over recent years. FTA's objective will be to persuade ministers back to a programme delivering the required freight capacity in all transport modes but particularly road and rail consistent with the expected economic growth over the period 2001 - 2004. FTA will remind the Government that:

Road traffic growth is expected to increase by more that 10% over the period.

New road capacity will approach zero and no new schemes are expected during this period.

Most investment in rail infrastructure for freight services has been categorised by Railtrack as requiring high Government grants.

Major private sector investments in ports and airports have failed to attract Government funding for the supporting infrastructure.

FMCEC members are frequent users of road and rail transport. Additionally, FMCEC is a member of the FTA and you are encouraged therefore to enter the debate. Contact: Susan Moody, Freight Transport Association.
Tel: 01892 526171 Fax: 01892 552359

A STRATEGY FOR THE MILLENNIUM

Like any business, there must be a process of continual change and development for trade associations. Whilst the FMCEC is not in business to make profit it still needs to satisfy the needs of member companies. With the fast approaching millennium, the mind turns to taking stock of progress made and planning for the future.

Against this background FMCEC Council has launched a strategic review of our structure and services. What are the factors that we need to take into account now if we are to prosper into the start of the new century? The panel below shows five challenging questions that have already emerged from the review.

Is there a real British point of view for the FMCEC to represent or is our industry now truly international in its concerns and priorities?

We have an increasing number of component and accessory suppliers in membership is our structure and range of services appropriate to their interests?

With the advent of electronic communications and commerce, are we making the best of these opportunities?

With corporate time under such pressure, how can we best maximise the value of time voluntarily committed by members on FMCEC activities?

Have we the correct level of resources, prioritised in the right way, to ensure that FMCEC prospers in the new millennium?

GREY MACHINE BLUES CONTINUE EUROPEAN COMMISSION QUESTIONS HMG

Since the last issue of Newsline the Federation has been informed that the European Commission has formally asked HMG (the DTI) what they are doing to effectively monitor and take action to prevent non-compliant machinery being operated in the UK. The Commission is particularly concerned about excavators and mobile cranes where significant numbers are known to be entering the UK in a condition which did not comply with all the appropriate EU regulations.

With the co-operation of FMCEC, the Health & Safety Executive (HSE) has investigated where appropriate and sent letters emphasising the need for full compliance with EU regulations to companies known to have purchased 'grey' machines. HSE will continue this practice and act upon any information sent to them to identify non-compliant machinery.

Plainly there is a political problem, the government is under fire from the Commission but HSE say they cannot do more within their existing resources - so what happens next? The Federation had already set up meetings with the appropriate government ministers, but sadly the Prime Minister moved both of them elsewhere! The pressure will, however, continue with the incoming ministers.

In the meantime reports to the Federation of non-compliant machines have reduced during recent weeks. Perhaps this is a sign that Federation pressure for DTI and HM Customs to work together to identify non-compliant machines - as has been done in the USA - has resulted in a slowdown of such machines. Alternatively it may be due to the increased vigilance of buyers of new machines asking more questions about compliance before they buy 'greys' because when these machines are put into use they become vulnerable to HSE or local authority action for non-compliance.

A view has been expressed that if HSE is too short of resources to adequately monitor, and take action on non-compliant machines than perhaps the Government should authorise a private enterprise organisation to do the job leaving HSE only to take an interest when accidents occur! Privately operated wheel clamping was introduced to help reduce unauthorised parking, maybe there is scope for a self-funding monitoring operation. Fines for non-compliance invariably work better than admonishments!

Many of us may feel that EU regulations cause more problems than they solve, but either way there are legal obligations facing manufacturers, importers and operators of construction machinery and the Federation believes that all concerned should accept their responsibilities rather than look for ways to avoid them. The 'level playing field' concept is widely used these days and the Federation will continue to do what it can to help both manufacturers and users of equipment ensure that they operate within the applicable laws and regulations.

GOVERNMENT PLANS TO INTRODUCE THE CLIMATE CHANGE LEVY

This new tax on business which will add to costs, hit competitiveness and possibly threaten thousands of jobs is to be introduced in March 2000. The government claims that it is an environmental tax. In fact it will do nothing to help the environment because as British companies are priced out of manufacturing in the UK, countries where environmental standards are far lower - if they exist at all will take up the work.

The CBI is concerned about damage to the British manufacturing industry and there is scepticism about any levy on the business use of energy being offset by cuts in employers' national insurance contributions and possible support for energy efficiency schemes to be introduced from April 2001.
If your company has reservations about the information currently available please tell us so that Council can decide the extent to which we should join others in lobbying about the effects of this plan on our industry.