Global HSE Group launches dedicated health and safety division led by Paul Westwick

Global HSE Group launch and leadership appointment

Global HSE Group has launched a dedicated Health and Safety (H&S) division, positioned to provide Health and Safety, Fire and Water Hygiene support through a single provider for property investors and managing agents.

The company said the new division will be led by Paul Westwick, who joins as Safety, Health, Environment, and Quality (SHEQ) Lead.

Westwick is described as having specialist experience in commercial risk management across high-value portfolios in the built environment.

Global HSE Group said he has 25 years’ group management experience, built on 18 years’ advisory work.

Westwick said: “I am thrilled to lead the health and safety division.

“For too long, property managers have had to juggle three different consultancies for their core compliance needs.

“It creates gaps in data and gaps in safety.

“Our goal with this new division is to close those gaps.

“By integrating Fire Risk Assessments, Water Hygiene, and health and safety Auditing into one expert-led service, we are helping them build safer, more valuable assets.”

Scope of services and stated rationale

Global HSE Group said the launch responds to demand for an integrated approach to building safety, with the Building Safety Act 2022 increasing regulatory pressure on Accountable Persons.

The company described managing health and safety, fire and water including Legionella in separate workstreams as a risk.

The new division is intended to provide audits, policy management and ISO 45001 systems within health and safety support.

Fire safety support is described as Fire Risk Assessments (FRA) and strategies.

Water hygiene support is described as Legionella risk assessments and management systems.

Andrew Cooper, Managing Director of Global HSE Group, said: “This launch marks a pivotal step in our growth strategy.

“Our clients in the commercial and housing sectors have increasingly asked for a partner who can view compliance holistically rather than in isolation.

“By bringing Health and Safety and Water Hygiene in-house to sit alongside our established Fire Engineering and Passive Fire divisions, we can now offer a truly integrated safety solution.

“Paul’s commercial expertise and pragmatic approach make him the perfect leader to drive this division forward and deliver real value to our clients.”

NAHFO publishes 2026 annual conference programme for University of Liverpool

NAHFO annual conference programme now live

The programme for the NAHFO Annual Conference & Exhibition 2026 has been published for 8 to 10 June 2026 at the University of Liverpool.

NAHFO describes the three-day event as bringing together healthcare fire safety, estates and risk professionals.

Day one opens with welcome remarks from Stewart Crowe, Assistant Director at Liverpool University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust.

Paul Fitzpatrick, Director of Estates & Facilities at Liverpool University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, is listed to speak on responsible person and fire safety duties.

Cheryl Couling, Principal Consultant at Fire Safety Partnership, is scheduled to present an overview of the authorising engineer (fire) role within healthcare estates.

Louise Mansfield, Legal Director at Bevan Brittan, is scheduled to lead a session titled The Building Safety Act in Practice: What’s New, What Still Applies, What to Do Now.

The day one agenda also includes a TECL case study on passive fire protection and digital tools and a session on lithium-ion battery fire risk led by Emily Bond, PhD Researcher at Queen’s University Belfast.

Sessions listed across the three days of the NAHFO programme

Day two includes a session on hospital evacuation strategies led by Aoife Hunt, Professor of Crowd Safety and Security Science at the University of Greenwich, and Steve Gwynne, Professor of Evacuation and Pedestrian Dynamics at the University of Greenwich.

Graham Gray, Fire Safety Manager at the University of Sussex, is scheduled to present a case study on managing fire alarm incidents in a live campus environment.

Mansfield is scheduled to lead Fire Safety on Trial: Decisions, Consequences and Accountability, described as a courtroom-based session with audience participation.

Rik Hutchins, CEO at Soterweb, is listed to present an industry session on digital platforms for fire risk and building safety.

Mitch Dean, National Sales Manager at SDS, is scheduled to present on designing, testing and maintaining fire doors for complex healthcare environments.

The programme also lists a session on 3D building mapping with intelligent AI asset recognition led by Derek Lawrence and Lee Searle of Safelincs.

Aoife Hunt is scheduled to present a session titled Martyn’s Law Connected. Protected. Prepared?

A session on solar panels and photovoltaic systems is listed, focused on safety, risk and best practice.

Sponsors and day three CPD sessions

The published programme lists Honeywell as gold sponsor and BORIS Software Ltd/TECL_UK and SOTERweb as silver sponsors.

Day three is presented as a professional development day with four CPD-accredited sessions operating via a colour-coded rotation system.

The day three CPD sessions listed are titled Digital Workforce and Fire Safety Compliance and are attributed to Boris Software.

The programme also lists a closing reflections session titled Connected. Protected. Prepared – Reflections, Leadership and What Comes Next, including an announcement of the NAHFO Annual Conference 2027 in London.

The programme includes an AGM for members on day one and an awards dinner on day two.

Fire Aware backs BSR drive to raise competence across fire safety

BSR and Fire Aware’s position

Fire Aware has announced support for the Building Safety Regulator (BSR) as part of its campaign for cultural change across the fire safety industry.

The position was set out in a Fire Aware statement on its work with the regulator.

The organisation noted that the BSR became a formal standalone arm’s length body in January, operating under the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government after transferring from the Health and Safety Executive (HSE).

Fire Aware added that it is advising member organisations across multiple sectors on engagement with the regulator.

Gavin Skelly said: “We fully endorse the move towards cultural change.

“We must remember – those who hold a duty of care at all levels are working in a vocation, and not just a job.

“We are working with our members to improve the standards of our buildings old and new and to improve the competence of those working within them who hold a duty of care.

“The essence of the BSR’s aims are aligned with our own.

“Fire Aware would support this requirement and direct any of its members involved in the Gateway system to help the regulator achieve its goal, similar to that of Fire Aware’s mission, to primarily uphold public safety.”

Skelly also commented that all parts of the supply chain across multiple sectors should adopt the same vocational approach to duty of care.

Charters and duty of care

Fire Aware described its campaign as focusing on the moral responsibility of those working in the fire safety supply chain, including designers, developers, asset owners, managers and other stakeholders.

The body said it intends to introduce a moral code of conduct through a series of charters aimed at shaping how member companies behave when upholding their duty of care.

Fire Aware characterised itself as a recognised membership body serving the built environment and related sectors with a shared aim to work and trade responsibly to best practice standards in the interests of public safety.

The organisation’s stance links its internal charter programme with the regulator’s expectations for those submitting safety cases to the BSR.

De-Wipe adds dog shampoo and conditioner to its decontamination range

De-Wipe dog shampoo and conditioner for investigation dogs

De-Wipe has launched De-Wipe Dog Shampoo & Conditioner for fire investigation dogs, with samples available on request.

The company said the product was developed to remove contaminants and support the work of investigation dogs.

De-Wipe described the product as intended to help remove fireground contaminants while caring for dogs’ skin and coat.

It said effective decontamination can remove substances including soot, hydrocarbons and other combustion products that can be absorbed into a dog’s coat and skin.

Use after incidents and handling contamination

De-Wipe said fire investigation dogs can carry toxic fireground residues on their coat, paws and harness, which can increase the risk of cross-contamination to handlers, vehicles, kennels and home environments.

The company added that regular decontamination supports skin and coat health and can help reduce irritation and long-term health risks linked to repeated exposure.

It also said cleaning after exposure is intended to ensure dogs are safe, comfortable and ready for their next task without carrying residual contamination forward.

Martin Lown at Phoenix Forensic Service Provider FireWise UK Learning Academy said: “I have been really impressed with the new dog shampoo. It smells great and, most importantly, it effectively removes the lingering smell of contaminants after operations.

“After washing, Hygge is left with that fresh ‘puppy smell’, which is a huge improvement.

“It’s a product / am very happy to use and would definitely recommend.”

PFAS plan outlines UK monitoring and regulatory steps through 2028

PFAS plan sets three pillars for action

A UK government policy paper has been published setting out a framework for managing PFAS risks across society and the environment.

The UK Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs (Defra) published the policy paper, titled PFAS Plan: building a safer future together, updated 3 February 2026.

The plan is structured around three pillars: understanding PFAS sources, tackling PFAS pathways, and reducing ongoing exposure to PFAS.

PFAS are described as a group of thousands of chemicals, with the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) definition used to guide the actions in the plan.

The paper identifies widespread use across sectors including firefighting foams, medical devices, textiles, packaging, construction and electronics manufacture.

Emma Hardy MP, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State (Minister for Water and Flooding), said: “Together, we can take a coordinated approach to make sure that ‘forever chemicals’ are not a forever problem.”

Monitoring, mapping and research actions

PFAS have been found in remote parts of the globe such as Antarctica.

They are characterised as highly mobile, persistent, and able to accumulate in soils, plants and animals, particularly in aquatic environments.

Monitoring data shows PFAS present in approximately 80% of surface water samples, approximately 50% of groundwater samples, and all fish samples.

English water companies carried out more than 770,000 analyses for individual PFAS in 2024 to inform drinking water assessments.

The plan commits to continuing annual monitoring of 2,400 PFAS samples from the freshwater environment in England.

In Scotland, annual monitoring will continue with an expanded network from around 300 samples in 2025 to 500 samples in 2026.

By the end of 2026, the Environment Agency’s PFAS multicriteria Geographic Information System (GIS) prioritisation map is to be made available to all public sector bodies across England, with the option of a dedicated interactive website by the end of 2027.

Soil monitoring will be strengthened through a British Geological Survey feasibility study and pilot sampling at a minimum of five representative locations across England.

A multi-year assessment of PFAS contamination in estuarine and coastal environments in England is due by February 2028, based on targeted sampling and analysis of sediment, fish and benthic invertebrates.

The government will also consider adding further PFAS to the UK Pollutant Release and Transfer Register (PRTR), following an industrial emissions consultation published in August 2025.

Regulation, foams and exposure measures

The UK’s obligations under the UN Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) include prohibitions on PFOS, PFOA and PFHxS, including their salts and related compounds.

Following a May 2025 convention-level agreement to list additional PFAS for global elimination, particularly long-chain perfluorocarboxylic acids (LC-PFCAs), the government is determining how to implement this domestically.

A proposed UK REACH restriction on PFAS in firefighting foams is currently under consultation.

Once the Health and Safety Executive has published its final opinion, a ministerial decision will be taken on whether to implement the restriction, with devolved government consent.

On exposure, the plan identifies multiple pathways including diet, drinking water, indoor dust and skin contact.

The Committee on Toxicity of Chemicals in Food, Consumer Products and the Environment is undertaking an independent review of PFAS, including whether different PFAS can be assessed together and whether health-based guidance values can be set.

The Food Standards Agency is working with the National Reference Laboratory to develop and validate PFAS tests for food, alongside ongoing monitoring of PFAS in food contact materials.

In Scotland, a statutory drinking water standard of 0.1 µg per litre for the sum of 20 named PFAS compounds has been in place since 1 January 2023.

In England and Wales, updated Drinking Water Inspectorate guidance requires monitoring of 48 named PFAS, with concentrations at or above 0.1 µg per litre reported as a water quality event requiring action.

The government will consult on introducing a statutory PFAS limit for England’s public water supply.

Further actions cover industrial emissions, including new cross-sector guidance for regulators and operators on PFAS handling, monitoring and disposal, and the development of environmental thresholds for emissions to air, land and water.

On waste and legacy contamination, the plan commits to further work on PFAS in landfill and waste routes, and a national framework to prioritise sites affected by historic PFAS pollution.

The plan is described as a first step, with implementation to be reviewed through the statutory Environment Improvement Plan reporting cycle.

Mental health pressures facing UK construction workers highlighted through site stand downs

Mental health stand down at Manchester Echo Street site

More than 250 workers paused work across Bowmer + Kirkland’s Echo Street development in Manchester for a site-wide stand down focused on mental health.

Ark Fire Protection said it delivered the initiative with Bowmer + Kirkland on Friday 14 November.

The stand down was structured as a planned interruption to routine activity so crews could step away from daily pressures and talk openly about wellbeing.

The session was led by The Lighthouse Charity, the construction sector’s dedicated charity for emotional, physical and financial support.

Its presentation covered suicide prevention, common warning signs and how workers can seek help.

After the talk, workers were encouraged to spend time together over coffee rather than returning immediately to site duties.

Industry data and context

National figures cited in the source material indicate that an average of two construction workers die by suicide every working day in the UK.

Construction workers are described as almost four times more likely to take their own lives than workers in other industries.

Studies from organisations including the Chartered Institute of Building and construction mental health charities are reported to show that around three quarters of workers have experienced mental health difficulties at some point in their careers.

More than nine in ten report work-related stress.

Over eight in ten report anxiety linked to their job.

Around six in ten report symptoms associated with depression.

The source links these outcomes to sustained pressure, long hours, financial strain and a longstanding reluctance to talk openly about mental health on sites.

Façade projections and wider support

Bowmer + Kirkland and Ark Fire Protection illuminated the building façade for three nights to extend the message beyond the immediate workforce.

The projections displayed three short phrases drawn from lived experience within construction.

They referenced workers feeling the need to conceal difficulties, claiming to be fine when they were not, and being seen as strong until they reached breaking point.

A group of campaign sponsors supported the installation, including Bolton Steel, Wysepower, Smith Painters, Brand Access Solutions, A&B Engineering, Xsign, Richmond Furniture, Eire Facades, KWBL, S1 Roofing, Taylor Hart and Zarafa Group.

Hot drinks were supplied by Grounded MCR, a social enterprise that supports and trains vulnerable adults.

Ark Fire Protection said the stand down and projection form part of a broader commitment by both companies to prioritise wellbeing across their sites and supply chains.

The Lighthouse Charity offers confidential 24/7 support to construction workers and their families, including counselling and emergency financial assistance.

The initiative sits alongside wider industry efforts to normalise conversations about mental health on construction sites.

US funding law boosts 9/11 health programme and fire service grants

One 9/11 law, two fire service impacts

The US government has been funded through Sept. 30, 2026 under a 2026 funding package signed into law by President Donald Trump.

The International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF) said the package advances priorities including protecting health care for 9/11 responders through the World Trade Center Health Program and increasing fire service staffing and equipment grants nationwide.

9/11 World Trade Center Health Program funding fix

The IAFF said the legislation includes a fix to the World Trade Center Health Program.

The package incorporates key components of the IAFF-backed 9/11 Responders and Survivor Health Funding Correction Act.

The IAFF said this corrects the programme’s funding formula and supports long-term solvency.

Kelly said: “Fire fighters who responded to the terrorist attack at Ground Zero answered the call without hesitation.

“‘Never forget’ means making sure these brave men and women have access to the healthcare they need to combat the long-term illnesses they’re facing due to their service on 9/11.”

Slevin said Congress is upholding its promise to 9/11 responders by fully funding the WTCHP.

Slevin said: “The WTC Health Program is critical for the thousands of first responders already diagnosed with 9/11-related illnesses – and for all those who will be diagnosed in the years ahead.

“As we approach the 25th anniversary of September 11th, New Yorkers – and all those who rushed to Ground Zero – now know this vital program will continue to be there for them.”

Fire service grants and other provisions

The IAFF said the bill increases both the Assistance for Firefighters Grant (AFG) and the Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response (SAFER) programmes by 5.5%.

The IAFF said this makes more than $342 million available nationwide as departments face staffing shortages.

Departments can use the funds to hire additional fire fighters and acquire new apparatus.

Departments can use the funds to better protect communities and fire fighters on the job.

The bill includes a $1 million increase for the Centers for Disease Control (CDC)’s National Fire Fighter Cancer Registry.

The bill includes a two-year extension for Medicare Ambulance Extender Payments.

The bill includes the IAFF-endorsed Honoring Our Living Donor (HOLD) Act, which improves income replacement for living organ donors who are temporarily unable to return to work while recovering from their surgery.

Fire Brigades Union criticises lifestyle references in London contaminants report

Lifestyle references criticised by the Fire Brigades Union

The Fire Brigades Union (FBU) has responded to the London Assembly Fire Committee report Exposure to fire contaminants in London: A hidden, growing risk?.

In its statement, the FBU said the report includes a recommendation referring to “positive lifestyle changes, including smoking cessation, physical fitness, diet, sleep hygiene, and alcohol awareness”.

Steve Wright, Fire Brigades Union general secretary, said: “Firefighters are dying younger and living with life-altering cancers and chronic illness.

“These are preventable occupational deaths, and this is a national scandal.

“The UK is decades behind other countries on this issue, and this report underlines the urgent need for basic, long-overdue measures: stronger prevention measures, regular health monitoring for all firefighters, and re-evaluation of compensation for firefighters’ occupational diseases.

“However, firefighters will rightly find the references to ‘lifestyle’ offensive.

“Firefighters are not getting sick because of personal choices – they are getting sick because they are being systematically exposed to toxic substances in the course of their work.

“When so many other countries and international bodies are doing the right thing and recognising the risks firefighters face, it is time for our own government to stop ignoring the evidence and act.”

Anna Stec, Professor of Fire Chemistry and Toxicity at the University of Lancashire, said: “While the report makes positive recommendations on the need for a UK-wide rollout of harmonised contamination exposure tracking and health monitoring for firefighters, the argument that firefighter cancers and diseases could be reduced through lifestyle changes is fallacious.

“Lifestyle factors influence health outcomes in any population, but they do not explain the elevated rates of cancer and disease seen in firefighters.

“Why should firefighters be expected to adopt such changes in order to compensate for the toxic environments they are routinely exposed to at work?”

Report findings and recommendations highlighted in the statement

The FBU statement also set out points from the London Assembly Fire Committee report, including its warning that firefighters in London may be routinely exposed to hazardous substances released during fires.

The findings identify asbestos, heavy metals and persistent organic pollutants among contaminants present at incidents.

The Committee notes that definitive UK evidence on cancer causation is still emerging.

Research presented to the Committee shows higher cancer incidence and abnormal tumour markers among firefighters compared with the general population.

The FBU said research it commissioned found that 4% of firefighters surveyed, around 1 in 25, reported a cancer diagnosis in a self-reported sample of more than 11,000 personnel.

Prevalence was highest among those aged 35 to 39, around three times the rate seen in the general population.

Between 10% and 15% of respondents were recorded as having abnormal tumour markers, compared with a control group drawn from the public.

The Committee concludes that the London Fire Brigade (LFB) Fire Contaminants Policy has shifted attitudes away from the “badge of honour” of dirty kit.

Implementation varies widely across stations, partly because of limitations in personal protective equipment availability and older station layouts.

The Committee urges the Government and the National Fire Chiefs Council (NFCC) to reduce firefighters’ exposure to fire contaminants.

Recommendations include creating a UK-wide exposure and health monitoring programme for firefighters.

A pilot of operational exposure monitoring in London is also proposed.

Further measures call for stronger training, assurance and compliance with fire contaminants policies, improved PPE supply and procurement planning, and greater emphasis on health promotion within occupational health services.

The Committee also asks the Industrial Injuries Advisory Council (IIAC) to review evidence on cancer risks linked to firefighting.

Chair of the London Assembly Fire Committee Zack Polanski AM said: “Fires don’t end when the flames are out as toxic contaminants can remain long afterward.

“Firefighters accept risk as part of the job, but exposure to toxic chemicals should not be an unavoidable consequence of protecting the public.

“While London Fire Brigade has made real progress, this report shows more needs to be done to understand and reduce the long-term health risks firefighters face.”

The report links decontamination practices, station design and long-term health monitoring as related areas for further action.

Firefighters remain exposed to hazardous fire residues despite policy changes, says London Assembly Report

Firefighters continue to face exposure to toxic contaminants

A London Assembly Fire Committee report warns that firefighters in London may be routinely exposed to hazardous substances released during fires.

The report Exposure to fire contaminants in London: A hidden, growing risk? was produced by the London Assembly Fire Committee.

The findings identify asbestos, heavy metals and persistent organic pollutants among contaminants present at incidents.

The Committee notes that definitive UK evidence on cancer causation is still emerging.

Research presented to the Committee shows higher cancer incidence and abnormal tumour markers among firefighters compared with the general population.

Fire Brigade Union commissioned research found that 4% of firefighters surveyed, around 1 in 25, reported a cancer diagnosis in a self-reported sample of more than 11,000 personnel.

Prevalence was highest among those aged 35 to 39, around three times the rate seen in the general population.

Between 10% and 15% of respondents were recorded as having abnormal tumour markers, compared with a control group drawn from the public.

Policy progress and recommendations for national action

The Committee concludes that the London Fire Brigade (LFB) Fire Contaminants Policy has shifted attitudes away from the “badge of honour” of dirty kit.

Implementation varies widely across stations, partly because of limitations in personal protective equipment availability and older station layouts.

The Committee urges the Government and the National Fire Chiefs Council to reduce firefighters’ exposure to fire contaminants.

Recommendations include creating a UK-wide exposure and health monitoring programme for firefighters.

A pilot of operational exposure monitoring in London is also proposed.

Further measures call for stronger training, assurance and compliance with fire contaminants policies, improved PPE supply and procurement planning, and greater emphasis on health promotion within occupational health services.

The Committee also asks the Industrial Injuries Advisory Council to review evidence on cancer risks linked to firefighting.

Chair of the London Assembly Fire Committee Zack Polanski AM said: “Fires don’t end when the flames are out as toxic contaminants can remain long afterward.

“Firefighters accept risk as part of the job, but exposure to toxic chemicals should not be an unavoidable consequence of protecting the public.

“While London Fire Brigade has made real progress, this report shows more needs to be done to understand and reduce the long-term health risks firefighters face.”

The report treats decontamination practices, station design and long-term health monitoring as closely connected areas for further action.

Lifestyle references criticised by the Fire Brigades Union

The Fire Brigades Union (FBU) has responded to the London Assembly Fire Committee report Exposure to fire contaminants in London: A hidden, growing risk?.

In its statement, the FBU said the report includes a recommendation referring to “positive lifestyle changes, including smoking cessation, physical fitness, diet, sleep hygiene, and alcohol awareness”.

Steve Wright, Fire Brigades Union general secretary, said: “Firefighters are dying younger and living with life-altering cancers and chronic illness.

“These are preventable occupational deaths, and this is a national scandal.

“The UK is decades behind other countries on this issue, and this report underlines the urgent need for basic, long-overdue measures: stronger prevention measures, regular health monitoring for all firefighters, and re-evaluation of compensation for firefighters’ occupational diseases.

“However, firefighters will rightly find the references to ‘lifestyle’ offensive.

“Firefighters are not getting sick because of personal choices – they are getting sick because they are being systematically exposed to toxic substances in the course of their work.

“When so many other countries and international bodies are doing the right thing and recognising the risks firefighters face, it is time for our own government to stop ignoring the evidence and act.”

Anna Stec, Professor of Fire Chemistry and Toxicity at the University of Lancashire, said: “While the report makes positive recommendations on the need for a UK-wide rollout of harmonised contamination exposure tracking and health monitoring for firefighters, the argument that firefighter cancers and diseases could be reduced through lifestyle changes is fallacious.

“Lifestyle factors influence health outcomes in any population, but they do not explain the elevated rates of cancer and disease seen in firefighters.

“Why should firefighters be expected to adopt such changes in order to compensate for the toxic environments they are routinely exposed to at work?”

Report Summary: Exposure to fire contaminants in London: A hidden, growing risk?

Why the investigation was launched

The report states that firefighters are expected to accept risk as part of their work, but that exposure to fire contaminants represents an emerging and less visible risk, particularly in relation to cancer.

Purpose of the Committee’s inquiry

The London Assembly Fire Committee launched its investigation to examine how these risks are manifesting in London, the evidence linking exposure to cancer, and what actions could better protect firefighters locally and nationally.

Nature of exposure in London

Evidence presented to the Committee indicates that firefighters in London are exposed to products of combustion at fire incidents, and that these exposures are broadly similar to those faced elsewhere in the UK.

Cumulative exposure in London

Witnesses told the Committee that, because of the high number of fires attended in London, there may be risks associated with cumulative exposure, even though London is otherwise comparable to other large metropolitan areas.

Evidence and uncertainty on cancer causation

The report notes that definitive UK evidence of direct causal links between firefighting and specific cancers is still developing, given the varied nature of exposures and the time it can take for related illnesses to emerge.

International evidence context

The Committee references the International Agency for Research on Cancer’s 2023 designation of occupational exposure as a firefighter as carcinogenic, while also noting that more UK-specific research is needed.

Why uncertainty should not delay action

The Committee argues that the absence of definitive causal proof should not prevent action, and that better assessment, measurement and tracking of exposure is needed.

Call for a national monitoring programme

The report recommends that central government, working with the National Fire Chiefs Council and devolved administrations, establish a UK-wide firefighter exposure and health monitoring programme with national standards for data collection and long-term surveillance.

Recommendation on compensation evidence review

The Committee recommends that the Industrial Injuries Advisory Council undertake a fresh review of the evidence on cancer risks linked to firefighting, in light of developments since its 2021 position paper.

Progress made by London Fire Brigade

The Committee recognises that London Fire Brigade (LFB) has taken several steps since publishing its Fire Contaminants Policy in 2022, and that this has led to a clear cultural shift away from viewing dirty kit as a “badge of honour”.

Key elements of the policy in practice

The report describes changes such as safe disrobe procedures, the use of designated zones within fire stations to reduce cross-contamination, and the expectation that firefighters should shower within an hour of exposure.

Changes to frontline practice

Witnesses and site visits indicated that firefighters are now more focused on decontamination at incidents and on preventing secondary exposure when returning to stations or fire engines.

Persistent practical barriers

The report identifies ongoing challenges with the availability of personal protective equipment, including shortages reported in 2025, which have affected implementation of the policy in some cases.

Financial and operational pressures

The Committee notes that increased cleaning and replacement of PPE are placing additional pressure on fire and rescue service budgets.

Station design as a structural constraint

The report finds that many older fire stations were not designed with modern contamination control in mind, making it difficult to separate clean and contaminated areas consistently.

Cross-contamination risks in existing stations

The Committee observed that, in some stations, contaminated equipment still has to pass through areas intended to remain clean because of building layout constraints.

Recommendations on future PPE contracts

The report recommends that LFB ensure its next PPE contract is designed to meet current and anticipated demands from fire contaminants policies, including more frequent cleaning, faster turnaround times and sufficient stock levels.

Recommendation on exposure monitoring in London

The Committee calls for LFB to develop a time-limited pilot exposure monitoring programme for operational firefighters, scoped in 2026/27 and launched in 2027/28, developed with academic and occupational health experts.

Existing health screening arrangements

The report records that London firefighters receive routine medicals every three years, including basic cardiorespiratory checks and an asbestos-specific element.

Limits of cancer screening

The Committee notes that comprehensive cancer screening for firefighters is complex, and that some cancers most strongly associated with firefighting, such as mesothelioma and bladder cancer, do not currently have safe, reliable population-level screening tests in routine NHS use.

Prevention and occupational health

The report recommends that LFB strengthen its prevention-focused approach by embedding proactive health promotion, including support around smoking cessation, fitness, diet, sleep and alcohol, within routine occupational health provision.

Regulatory context

The Committee records that the Health and Safety Executive considers the existing regulatory framework, including the Health and Safety at Work Act, COSHH regulations and Workplace Regulations, sufficient to reflect firefighting’s classification as a carcinogenic occupation.

Overall conclusion of the Committee

The Committee concludes that LFB’s Fire Contaminants Policy represents a substantial step forward, but that further national coordination, better exposure data, improved PPE systems and updated fire station design standards are needed to reduce long-term health risks for firefighters.

Maintaining seal performance: MEIKO UK tackles BA contamination

MEIKO UK Managing Director Paul Anderson explains automated BA mask decontamination, focusing on repeatability, operator exposure and workshop workflows for respiratory kit teams

Firefighters rely on breathing apparatus masks and personal protective equipment that must perform consistently in hostile environments.

During incidents and training, this equipment is exposed to soot, fine particulates and biological contaminants that can remain embedded if cleaning is poorly controlled.

For BA masks and regulators, residue can affect the seal, compromise performance or expose the next wearer to harmful substances.

Amid growing awareness of occupational health risks and cancer exposure, many fire and rescue services have moved away from manual, sink-based cleaning towards automated, repeatable processes in dedicated workshops.

MEIKO UK Managing Director Paul Anderson sat down with IFSJ Editor Iain Hoey to explain how the company’s TopClean washer-disinfector systems work, the problems they are designed to solve and how controlled cleaning processes are reshaping BA mask and PPE hygiene in the fire service.

What risks do fire services face when BA masks and PPE are not cleaned using a controlled and repeatable process?

Over recent years, fire services have placed much greater emphasis on firefighter health.

It is now widely recognised that fires expose equipment to carcinogens that can adhere to clothing and breathing apparatus masks and then be inhaled by the next wearer.

In some cases, the person cleaning the equipment may also be exposed.

Protecting firefighters therefore has to be central to how PPE is managed.

Traditionally, many services relied on a three-sink method, where equipment is dipped sequentially through separate sinks.

That approach leaves significant room for variation, relies heavily on individual practice and typically involves large volumes of chemicals, leading to inconsistent results.

With an automated process, cleaning is built around defined parameters such as time, temperature, mechanical action and chemistry.

When those elements are balanced correctly, the result is a controlled and repeatable method of cleaning every time, reducing water and chemical use while providing a consistent outcome for BA masks and other PPE.

From a technical perspective, what makes BA masks and regulators more challenging to clean than general PPE?

Cleaning PPE is very different from cleaning items like glassware or plates.

PPE goes straight back onto the human body and sits in close contact with the skin, so there has to be confidence that contaminants are fully removed.

With BA masks, cleaning the outside alone is not enough.

The inside of the mask also has to be cleaned thoroughly.

After a fire, particulates drawn into the mask can remain detectable by smell and those residues can carry bacteria and other contaminants that should not be inhaled.

The process therefore has to address both internal and external surfaces using appropriate temperatures and, where required, specific levels of disinfection.

This approach is well established in healthcare settings, where defined contact times during the final rinse are used alongside temperature and chemistry to remove viruses.

The aim is to clean a mask to a standard where it can be safely worn by one firefighter and then issued to another immediately afterwards.

Other items such as helmets, gloves and boots present fewer challenges because they are not part of the breathing system.

Masks are more demanding, and regulators and breathing components must also be protected during cleaning.

This is achieved using controlled air connections that prevent water from entering sensitive areas, allowing a fully automated process that protects the equipment while delivering a high standard of hygiene.

How do washer-disinfectors improve consistency and limit exposure compared with manual cleaning?

The cleaning process is built around what is commonly referred to as Sinner’s circle, which brings together time, temperature, mechanical action and chemistry.

In manual cleaning, those elements are applied inconsistently and are heavily influenced by the individual carrying out the task.

With an automated system, all parameters are controlled.

In a manual sink-based process, half a litre to a litre of detergent per sink is common.

In an automated washer-disinfector, chemical use is typically around seven millilitres per litre of water, and even less during the final rinse.

That level of control directly affects exposure, energy use and resource consumption.

The system uses less chemical, less water and less energy overall, which means less contaminated water entering the drainage system and a more contained process for the operator.

Throughput is also significantly higher.

Up to 40 BA masks can be cleaned per hour, with larger systems such as the TopClean D increasing capacity further, while cleaning performance remains consistent internally and externally and is supported by validated process data.

Why pressurise regulators during cleaning and what practical benefits does it deliver?

The TopClean M is designed to clean both the inside and outside of the BA mask while allowing regulators to be cleaned as part of the same process.

A regulator controls the flow of air from the cylinder to the wearer and certain internal areas cannot be exposed directly to water.

To address this, the system uses a low-pressure compressed air connection during the wash cycle.

This maintains internal air pressure within the regulator, preventing water from entering sensitive components.

The regulator is cleaned externally while its internal parts remain protected, delivering effective cleaning alongside protection of critical breathing components within a single controlled process.

How do clamping and racking features reduce cross-contamination inside larger systems?

The TopClean D is a larger system that many fire services now use as a single solution where space is limited.

It can clean masks, cylinders, backpacks, complete apparatus, gloves, boots and helmets within one controlled cycle.

It operates quickly while using less water and fewer chemicals and can incorporate heat recovery so energy from the process is reused to preheat incoming water.

Cross-contamination is prevented through controlled separation within the machine, with contaminants removed through filtration and discharged safely so items are not re-exposed during the cycle.

How are cycles and detergents set to remove contaminants without damaging seals, visors or valves?

Cleaning programmes are developed within the temperature ranges and parameters approved by mask and equipment manufacturers, supported by the relevant certifications.

Materials such as silicone and rubber need careful handling, as prolonged exposure to excessive heat can lead to gradual degradation and shorten service life.

To avoid that, temperatures, detergents and cycle times are matched to the materials being cleaned and checked in partnership with manufacturers.

This ensures contaminants are removed effectively while the integrity of seals, visors and valves is maintained.

What changes when services adopt automated cleaning and how might hygiene expectations evolve?

Moving from a manual process such as a three-sink system to an automated one is a significant change.

Initial reactions are often positive, as teams no longer need to clean equipment by hand, but structured training remains essential.

Teams are taken through the process from start to finish, supported by clear visual guidance displayed in the workshop.

The operation itself is kept simple, with most machines running on three main cycles: short, medium and long.

Heavily contaminated equipment requires a longer cycle, while routine post-training cleaning can be completed more quickly.

Training covers how to run the machine and how to maintain it, with elements such as colour-coding used to identify parts handled and cleaned daily.

Looking ahead, how do you see expectations around PPE and BA hygiene evolving?

Over the last two to three years, expectations around PPE hygiene have shifted quickly, influenced in part by developments in the United States, where contamination and cancer exposure among firefighters have been more openly discussed.

Cost will always shape decision-making.

Services still have to balance capital investment with ongoing spend on water, power and chemicals.

Systems that reduce resource use while delivering reliable decontamination allow services to improve protection for crews while making realistic choices about where money is spent over the life of the equipment.

This was originally published in the February 2026 Edition of International Fire & Safety Journal. To read your FREE copy, click here.