Rank: Forum user 
|
Can anyone tell me if it is acceptable for an employee to undertake noise level readings with a dosemeter (if trained in its use of course) and then hire in a competent noise risk assessor if need be?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
oops meant sound level meter not dosemeter- long afternoon- apologies
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Can't see a problem on the face of it but the cynic in me says that they'll get 'creative' with the positioning if there is any benefit to be gained.
I almost regret saying this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
I don't understand - what is the concern about doing this?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Hi Kate, its the question of competence being raised by the employer as he has suggested the readings need to be undertaken by someone outside of the company which I have disagreed with. Long day as I said.........
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Safetybod, I suggest that this is the default position taken by very many (most?) employers where the H&S manager does what they can, up to their limit of their own competence, and then calls for expert assistance as a supplement.
This would apply for noise, work at height, pressure equipment, hazardous substances, dangerous machinery, radiation etc etc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Whether someone is an employee or not has no bearing on their competence. Is the question really whether they are a specialist or not? I don't see why you'd need a specialist for some initial readings to decide whether or not you have a problem and whether it needs specialist attention - otherwise nothing would ever get done ...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Depending in the risk I would say it is fine if it is low, however in higher risk or more complex environments ouside an office they would need to know how to correctly:
calibrate it
position it
whether or not to use fast response / slow
A weighting
C weighting
duration of measurement
height
distance from reflecting surfaces
issues with cyclical noise
issue of impact noises
etc etc...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Safetybod
as others have said, there is no reason why not however, Descarte makes a valid point that for various reasons a number of spot measurements of the leq is rather limited and is unlikely to give you a truly representative lepd for many situations. Some form of dosimeter is almost certainly going to be far more accurate. If ear protection is subsequently identified as being needed (if other control measures are not suitable) then the sound level meter will be real handy to help decide on the correct for ear protection.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
The first noise assessment I consider is whether I need to raise my voice to have a conversation. If you do then that is when the alarms bells should start to ring. Taking spot measurements at typical ear positions should not be beyond the wit of most H&S professionals. If you need to measure over a duration then make sure that there is no outside interference with the results - though they will be visible on the plot.
Once you are in a position of concern then you may need to get the experts in, ideally to advise on how to reduce the noise exposure rather than to issue ear defenders.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
We use the Casella cel 350 badge system for periodic monitoring which we used predominantley to demonstrate that our controls are working; however if we get a result from those which we don't understand, i.e. we can change the tool, environment, exposure time, etc, then we'd call upon the services of a competent person who we're fortunate enough to have in-house, who will carry out a full noiuse assessment.
No connection to Casella by the way; I'm sure other devices are as good.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.