----- Original Message -----
From: "Rob" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, July 14, 2006 10:22 PM
Subject: Re: [BRITARCH] Any ideas what this anomaly could be?
Rob and Mark are almost right. Working to IFA standards, which I am, it is
of course 1.2m.
I hope you will note that the eastern side of the trench has been stepped
back to 1m. The northern side of the trench was shored with acro whilst work
was in process. This has now been removed to allow stepping back to 1m on
the northern side of the trench. The photographs were taken between the two
I hope this allows clarification.
> It can't. 1m is the guidance from the H&S executive I believe
> http://acorngenealogy.co.uk http://www.enchantedtimes.co.uk
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mark Collard" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Friday, July 14, 2006 10:19 PM
> Subject: Re: [BRITARCH] Any ideas what this anomaly could be?
> The mystery appears to be - how can a 2m high unsupported and non-battered
> section face be considered safe for working beneath nowadays?
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.0/388 - Release Date: 13/07/2006