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.



Go to last post Go to first unread
#1 Posted : 07 February 2020 14:10:20(UTC)
Rank: New forum user

Looking for some advice / guidance please regarding health surveillance. We had an air monitoring survey undertaken at our waste transfer station where we hold dry mixed recycling materials. Part of the action plan as a general recommendation was heatlh surveillance  - pre employment screening was recommended to be extended to include lung function tests due to the sensitisation properties of bioaersols. The results from the survey show high readings for endotoxins in the background samples taken from the loading bays where the waste is kept but no detection was found in the sample taken from the telehandler that staff use to load the waste from. Other bacterias tested came back as meduim levels in background samples. Personal samples for dust exposure all came back as low. Is anyone else in a similar situation? I need to obtain some details about what other Organisations in waste do and if possible bring this information to top managment as evidence of best practice in the industry. Any help appreciated. Thanks in advance!

#2 Posted : 07 February 2020 14:20:11(UTC)
Rank: Forum user

Hi Lisah

Some good information here:


https://www.hse.gov.uk/research/rrpdf/rr977.pdf - Occupational Hygiene implications of processing waste at Materials Recycling Facilities (MRFs) Exposure to bioaerosol and dust

thanks 1 user thanked MrBrightside for this useful post.
lisah on 09/02/2020(UTC)
#3 Posted : 12 February 2020 07:57:52(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user

Hi Lisa

must have missed this one....this report may help...there is another specific to waste transfer station i will dig it out...


thanks 1 user thanked stevedm for this useful post.
lisah on 12/02/2020(UTC)
#4 Posted : 12 February 2020 09:32:10(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user

Don't overlook what the ACoP for COSHH (6th edition) states. Note particularly the third condition which suggests that even if you believe you have all risks adequately covered skin health surveillance may still be required.

Examples where health surveillance is appropriate under the criteria in regulation 11(2)(b) are:

where there have been previous cases of work-related ill health in the workforce/place;

where there is reliance on PPE, eg gloves or respirators, as an exposure control measure; eg printers wearing gloves to protect against solvents used during press cleaning, or paint sprayers using two-pack paints wearing respirators to prevent asthma. Even with the closest supervision there is no guarantee that PPE will be effective at all times;

where there is evidence of ill health in jobs within the industry; eg frequent or prolonged contact with water (termed ‘wet-working’) causing dermatitis in hairdressers and healthcare workers, or breathing in mists from chrome plating baths causing chrome ulcers in platers.

Paragraph 238 amplifies this:

This is not a definitive or exhaustive list and there will be many other instances where health surveillance is required. Employers will need to seek information or advice on the specific health risks identified in the risk assessment, or through any topic-specific HSE guidance, trade associations or other professional sources.

thanks 1 user thanked chris.packham for this useful post.
lisah on 12/02/2020(UTC)
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.