Hello ALL
Just received this text in email from NPTC
this clarifys the situation quite nicely I think
"Dear Iain,
Thank you for sending through your comprehensive feedback on the content detail of the CS units. This is just the type of feedback we require from real practitioners. We will be responding to this separately as we bring together the various comments received. However, on reading your second email regarding refresher training I felt it pertinent to respond specifically to this now as there seems to have been some misunderstanding about our intentions.
The paragraph you quoted was actually intended to allay fears about new units coming out. It is quite normal that if we introduce new or revised CS units, people who already hold a chainsaw certificate of competence will be worried that they may have to “re-qualify”. This is absolutely not the case. Any qualification achieved is for life. A certificate states that on a given date the individual proved themselves as competent. Therefore, employers should continue to recognise pre-2009 qualifications in just the way that they still recognise the pre 1998 suites of units (CS10,11,12 + CS20,21,22).
If a completely new unit comes out, we would not credit old qualification holders with the new unit but we would issue guidance as to equivalence between the old and the new. If an operator did wish to be certificated for a new unit, they would be required to be assessed but there is no compulsion to achieve the new unit where they hold an older equivalent.
For example:
A candidate who holds CS10, CS11 and CS14 (maintenance, felling small trees and takedown pre 1998) has the equivalent of the current CS30 and CS31 which are the pre-requisites for CS32. This candidate would be able to proceed with the old units as pre-requisite to achieve the current CS32. However, we would certificate the candidate with CS32 but not CS30 or 31 (as they already hold the old units).
Example 2:
When we launched CS47 (chainsaw use from a MEWP) we also issued guidance stating that existing operators who hold a MEWP qualification and CS39 should be considered to have the same competencies and therefore would not need to achieve CS47 for conducting work from a MEWP. However, if they did want to have CS47 on their certificate they would have to be assessed.
The recommendation for refresher training is something that has been in place at least since the introduction of the PUWER regulations in 1998. This is governed by the HSE, not NPTC. The details of what is required are laid down in the HSE AFAG publication AFAG805 – Training and Certification (see link below) essentially it is a recommendation for refresher training every 3-5 years.
http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/afag805.pdf states:
“Where experienced, full-time operators have received basic training and/or achieved a Certificate of Competence, it is recommended that they attend regular refresher training to maintain their skills and knowledge level. Competency certificates will normally identify the refresher training period and in most cases this would be within five years. However, refresher training may need to be provided more often (every two to three years) for those operators who use their skills less frequently. It is recommended that non-certificated training also follows these time periods.”
(Of course, one acceptable alternative to refresher training would be to re-take the CS units but this is not a requirement)
The reason for the statement about our units remaining valid provided refresher training has been completed is because by simply stating that the old units are still valid could imply that we are contradicting HSE advice. The HSE AFAG committee are carrying out a separate piece of work around improving the level and effectiveness of refresher training or an appropriate alternative.
Any old or current or future CS units are and will remain valid but the HSE recommend that refresher training should be taken and in the event of an inspection or accident investigation, would want to see evidence of what refresher training had taken place since the CS units were achieved.
I hope this clarifies the matter for you. I have also answered your individual questions below in purple. If you wish to discuss this further, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Yours sincerely
Joe Jarvis "