Third party duties

Jack Hubball is a lead criminalist with the Connecticut State Police Forensic Laboratory. The Chemistry Section of the laboratory provides analyses for organic compounds from a variety of samples submitted from crime scenes. However, the majority of samples are from suspect-arson fire scenes. Many of these samples contain pyrolysis products and/or polymer additives. During his tenure at the Forensic Laboratory, Dr. Hubball has analyzed more than 10,000 items. In addition to his duties as an analyst, he is the quality manager for the Forensic Laboratory and is responsible for most aspects of the lab QA/QC program. He is the laboratory representative to the Connecticut State Police K-9 Unit and provides final testing and third party certification for the accelerant, drug and explosives detection teams. 

By contrast, the delivery of most medical care in the United States is now need-based—bureaucratic-statist, paid, partly or entirely, by Medicare, Medicaid, or so-called private health insurance. Access to, and reimbursement for, medical services is premised on the assumptions that its proper distribution is the duty of the state or other third party HMOs should approve and in-... 

Liability insurance All teachers employed by the LEA will normally be covered for Third Party Liability insurance to cover their liability. Policies usually indicate guidelines, regulations and restrictions. However, this cover does not extend to activities undertaken outside of the normal requirements of a teacher s duty. It is therefore wise to have additional personal liability cover, for example though a union or professional association. 

Gilboy, j. (1998) Compelled Third-Party Participation in the Regulatory Process I gal Duties, Culture and Non-Compliance , Law and Policy 20/2 135-55. 

Safety-related controllers in conjunction with safety or fail safe I/O modules are used for critical and hazardous applications where an incident can result in danger to persons, and/or damage to plant and environment. These safety-related controllers can work with the safety-related distributed I/O system (may be with internal verification for input or output via safety switches as described in Clause 5.0.1—safe PLC approach), or directly with fail-safe transmitters cormected via the fieldbus. These controllers are supposed to detect faults both in the process and their own internal (self-diagnosis) to the system. It is the duty of the same to automatically set the plant to a safe state in the event of a fault. These controllers need to work in multitasking environment — may be in a mix of standard BPCS or safety-related applications, if integrated operation is permitted by the end-user. The programs of BPCS and SIS must be functionally separate, so that faults in BPCS applications have no effect on safety-related applications and vice versa. Special tasks with very short response times can also be implemented [14]. For safety applications controllers and I/O modules need to individually certified by third party and to comply SIL 2/SIL 3 (as the case may be — SIL 4 only for nuclear application) as per lEC 61508. For safety-related applications a few restrictions are followed such as ... 

The conclusions of the LOPA should be recorded. The record should include sufficient information to allow a third-party to understand the analysis and should justify the assumptions made and the choice of values for parameters such as human reliability, equipment failure rates and conditional modifiers. Where assumptions are made about the mode of operation of the facility (such as the proportion of the time tanks are being filled, or the number of tanks on gasoline duty) these should be documented so that their continuing validity can be checked. 

Historically, there has been no duty on users of electrical equipment in flammable atmospheres to select equipment that has been approved or certified for use in such environments. The duty on employers, under the Health and Safety at Work Act, section 2, and the Electricity at Work Regulations, Regulation 6, has been to select equipment that is safe, so far as is reasonably practicable. However, guidance published by the HSE and others is that the best way of ensuring compliance is to use equipment that has been approved or certified against published standards by an appropriate test body. Similarly, suppliers of such equipment have been advised to ensure that their products are tested by an independent third party against the relevant standards before placing them on the market. 

It is not possible for a producer of waste to rid themselves of it simply by handing it over to another. Anybody who carries, keeps, treats, or disposes of waste, or who acts as a third party and arranges matters such as imports or disposal must satisfy a duty of care . 

These duties apply even though an employee may be working away on third party premises, or where an employee has been hired out to another employer, but where the control of the task he is performing remains with... 

Traditionally, mine operators have attempted to avoid conduct that could give rise to such a duty in order to insulate themselves from tort liabihty for on-the-job injuries to the independent contractor s employee. Because the independent contractor has complete control over the manner and method by which the work is performed, and legal responsibUity for the safety of his own employees, mine owners, like other third parties, should generally bear no tort habflity when a contractor s employee is injured. However, the law provides that where the owner, for whatever reason, involves himself in the way that the contractor conducts his operations or otherwise interferes with the independence of the contractor with respect to such matters, the owner can be held to have assumed a duty of care and can be held directly liable for the injuries suffered by the contractor s employee through the operator s negligence. For example, where the mine owner has directed the contractor with respect to how to conduct its operations, advised the contractor with respect to the safety of its operations, or otherwise involved itself in the manner and method of the contractors work, injured employees of the contractor have, with remarkable success, sued the mine owner to recover damages. 

The concept of safe place of work Is derived from the law, which has long recognised the duty of the employer to provide a safe place of work and a safe means of access to it and egress from It. But the concept Is not just a technicality. To ensure safety, hazards need to be identified and avoided - possibly by changing the design or work method. If this cannot be done, then control Is required, and this extends to others who may be affected by the work - other contractors, employees or third parties. 

However with the availability of specially engineered safety PLCs for general use in industry it becomes far less attractive on grounds of cost and engineering effort to take that route. Even when the system has been adapted for safety it still requires a third party to verify that it is suitable for the safety duties. 

Defines car defects with regard to wheels, axles and boxes, body and couplers. Freight cars must be inspected for defects before a train departs and also when cars are interchanged between railroads. While cars are often owned by shippers and third parties, the requirement for compliance with the Act is with the railroad. A railroad should refuse to accept such a defective car, or just haul it to a place of repair. Three Supreme Court cases going back to 1895 indicate railroad has an absolute duty to inspect cars it receives from another railroad, and hence is liable from harms caused by a defective car (Kenworthy, 1989). 

Municipalities are responsible for separate collection of WEEE from private households that have not been returned under the old for new rule, and must also estabUsh facilities where suppliers can deliver products taken back from households. In addition, municipalities have the duty to accept irreparable equipment that consumers have left with repair companies, if the latter require so. Repair companies have the same options as suppliers, i.e., sell the product to a third party, return it to the manufacturer, or importer, or to the municipality. In contrast with the proposed WEEE Directive, the Decree does not fix a target for separately collected WEEE. Further disposal of WEEE is the responsibility of manufacturers and importers that have the duty to take back and dispose end-of-life products that they placed on the market in the Netherlands. Also, municipalities and repair companies must return to the manufacturer any equipment bearing its brand, i.e., individual responsibility for brand-related products. 

---