Rank: Forum user 
|
Hi Im looking for some advice regarding the use of dust masks. We currently (historically) insist operators wear dust masks when decanting Icing sugar. We have extraction in place, are below the WEL and health surveillance the last 2 years all staff have no lung function issues. ( Only done surveillance last 2 years since i got the role). The question is
Do we really need to wear dust masks?
The icing sugar cloud is only in the air for a few seconds when operators are tipping the sugars into the mixing bowls.
Any advice would be appreciated
Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Well as you appreciate there is a requirement to deal with anything that is a hazard to human health including any dust that “present at a concentration in air equal to or greater than10 mg/m3, as a time-weighted average over an 8-hour period, of total inhalable dust, or 4 mg/m3, as a time-weighted average over an 8-hour period, of respirable dust;”(from COSHH regulation 2(1)) You what you need to do is monitor the levels of dust in the area and how long your staff are exposed to it. Remember this dust will remain in the air for some time (the only way to know how long this level persists, is to monitor it). I am glad that you are doing health surveillance but I am slightly confused by your statement that as the results of the health surveillance are negative, that this is a sign that the controls (ie masks) are no longer needed. Surely this is an indicator that the controls are actually working. What is the issue with the face masks that leads you to think that they should be disposed of? Are they uncomfortable, or too expensive, or whatever? Basically it’s down to you doing a risk assessment of your workspace, balancing all of the requirements for using face masks against the reasons not to use them. I can’t see how someone not completely familiar with your process can give you a definitive answer either way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Hi
Sorry for confusion! Yes it does show we have adequate controls if surveillance is fine. But are we going overkill?
The problem is yes cost and costs for face fit testing.
We are below the WEL for 10mg/m3 as a time weighted average although i will monitor the levels of dust and how long my staff are exposed to it further. Thanks Tom
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
For certain dusts you have to reduce expose as far as reasonably practical even beyond the WEL - however I have no idea if icing sugar falls within this as I'm not in the food industry
So I'd think that if your dust falls into this category then you should continue to wear (face-fit tested) dust masks, if not (& you're considerably below the WEL) then you wouldn't need to.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Have you carried out personal dose monitoring or just general workplace (or both)? I would sugest that if both and both of the readings are below the WEL then you dont need the masks. However employees might 'like' the idea of the 'extra' protectioin that the masks offer them and as such might be resistant to change? If you have not done the personal readings then carrying them out would show employees that they are not exposed to dangerous levels etc - however if there is a nuisance factor then removing the masks might be unpopular.
Maybe go back to source and see if you can improve the extraction? Can you modify the process in some way to minimise the dust genereation?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
You, of course appreciate, that there is no legal requirement for the staff to wear any sort of RPE. The requirement is to carry out a risk assessment, using all the available knowledge about the work such as health surveillance and dust monitoring, to decide what sort of controls(if any) are required. Before deciding to give up on the face masks you need to be certain that this will not increase the risk of harmful exposure to your staff.
Justifying the removal of old “controls” can be more difficult that justifying the adoption of new controls.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Thanks for all the feedback I quite like the sound of carrying out personal dose monitoring over a 8 hour period and see what the results are. Thanks Tom
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
I’m sure you will have thought of this, but as a diabetic myself thought I would just make sure. You may want to consider that fact as well as this sugar going into people lungs, it will be in their mouth if no mask. Only small amounts each time, but could have a cumulative effect, especially on someone struggling to control their diabetes.
Not sure how much of an issue this would be, but I personally might be concerned, so may be worth addressing. Depends on the frequency of task I guess.
Just a thought
Chris
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
We much prefer personal dose reading as they tell us what the employee is (likely to be) exposed to over a period of time; we do minimal workplace readings we are only really concerned with the personal exposure element. If you rely on workplace levels how do account for breaks, movement between tasks etc it becomes difficult to measure what each person/role is exposed to.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.