Welcome Guest! The IOSH forums are a free resource to both members and non-members. Login or register to use them

Postings made by forum users are personal opinions. IOSH is not responsible for the content or accuracy of any of the information contained in forum postings. Please carefully consider any advice you receive.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Svick1984  
#1 Posted : 05 July 2019 10:19:51(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Svick1984

Hi all, I'm currently trying to arrange an air monitoring survey for our factory due to the fact that we work with glass and there is risk of exposure to silica dust which is known to be cargionenic. I've received a few quotes and information on sampling methods; some vary in sample amounts and types (some specific to areas, tasks and/or personal sampling). I've reviewed L5 COSHH and I know under Reg 10 it states that for those carrying out the monitoring, they should be appropriately trained and experienced in monitoring exposure and familiar with the monitoring standards etc. However, are there any professional/accredited bodies that I should check to see whether they belong to? I've mainly checked to see if they are members of the British Occupational Hygiene Society (BOHS) but is there anything else people would recommend to check for? It is also more important that personal monitoring is done as opposed to fixed place monitoring? Thanks.

jodieclark1510  
#2 Posted : 05 July 2019 10:46:19(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
jodieclark1510

I'm not sure if UKAS would cover anything like this?

Svick1984  
#3 Posted : 05 July 2019 13:47:41(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Svick1984

Originally Posted by: jodieclark1510 Go to Quoted Post

I'm not sure if UKAS would cover anything like this?

Thanks Jodie; I thought this too, but my understanding of UKAS is that they 'check the checker'; so in this case, who would they be evaluating to say that 'this particular accrediation body meets the standards'? Or have I misunderstood? Thanks.

thanks 1 user thanked Svick1984 for this useful post.
A Kurdziel on 08/07/2019(UTC)
stevedm  
#4 Posted : 06 July 2019 07:21:45(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
stevedm

You are doing all the right things...BOHS certification is a lot like NeBOSH it can demonstrate compliance with reg 10 the same as NeBOSH does for R11 Man Regs...UKAS would be more for the lab...so for the training section Cert OH (check for BOHS memebership) and UKAS for mobile testers etc...

peter gotch  
#5 Posted : 06 July 2019 11:15:45(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
peter gotch

Svick

Without a clearer idea of circumstances in your factory it is impossible to say whether you would benefit more from fixed or personal monitoring, or a mixture of both.

Hopefully those quoting are sufficiently competent to explain their proposed methology and the rationale behind it.

Svick1984  
#6 Posted : 09 July 2019 07:21:31(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Svick1984

Originally Posted by: Svick1984 Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: jodieclark1510 Go to Quoted Post

I'm not sure if UKAS would cover anything like this?

Thanks Jodie; I thought this too, but my understanding of UKAS is that they 'check the checker'; so in this case, who would they be evaluating to say that 'this particular accrediation body meets the standards'? Or have I misunderstood? Thanks.

Hi all, thanks for your replies. Please can anyone confirm if what I stated before is correct and if so, which accreditation body should I be looking at for the testing side of it?

Svick1984  
#7 Posted : 09 July 2019 07:27:14(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Svick1984

Originally Posted by: stevedm Go to Quoted Post

You are doing all the right things...BOHS certification is a lot like NeBOSH it can demonstrate compliance with reg 10 the same as NeBOSH does for R11 Man Regs...UKAS would be more for the lab...so for the training section Cert OH (check for BOHS memebership) and UKAS for mobile testers etc...

Thanks Steve. So just to be clear, and ensure I haven't misunderstood, BOHS would tell me they are competent to come and carry out the testing on the premises, but UKAS would confirm their competency for lab testing?

Svick1984  
#8 Posted : 09 July 2019 07:47:06(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Svick1984

Originally Posted by: peter gotch Go to Quoted Post

Svick

Without a clearer idea of circumstances in your factory it is impossible to say whether you would benefit more from fixed or personal monitoring, or a mixture of both.

Hopefully those quoting are sufficiently competent to explain their proposed methology and the rationale behind it.

Hi Peter, I'm not sure what other details I could give to shed more light on the situation; we just want to be confident that the exposure to - and amount of - silica dust is just as low as possible. I know that fixed sample points do not directly represent employee exposure but it's hard to understand just how many personal and fixed samples that need to be taken to have a good sample size; I can't find anything about the number of samples advised to take, only that a few samples if often not enough to conclude long-term exposure (so as per usual, clear as mud). I know people might state, as you have, that it's mentioned in their proposed methodolgy, but without being an expert in the subject, how is someone to know whether their proposal is correct or not? It would be more helpful if guidance said, certain amout of samples on size of the area being monitored, how many activities are being done that generate the potential exposure etc, just some general guidance to work on (so if this is somewhere, and I've somehow missed it, I'd really appreciate it if someone could point me in the right direction). Thanks.

Svick1984  
#9 Posted : 10 July 2019 07:08:40(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Svick1984

Bump. Anyone please confirm the above and/or provide further details? Thanks.

Users browsing this topic
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.