Sounds like the type of activity that could possibly be undertaken dry in a (sand) blasting cabinet or over an extraction table - elimiates the damping fluid and its associated problems.

Hi Louise

We are not all "experts" on these Forums and none of us is an "expert" on everything.

Nothing is 100% "safe" - there are exposure limits for silica in EH40 and despite the carcinogenic notation the duty is to reduce exposure so far as reasonably practicable.

Seems to me that if your monitoring indicates that the exposure is well below the WEL, then perhaps it may not be reasonably practicable to use RPE to further reduce it. No "safe level" but reasonably to assume a dose-response" relationship or we might as well never leave the house for fear of breathing in one fibre of asbestos each day.

Roundtuit offers an alternative process but I wonder whether doing the work within a blast cabinet might impact the ability of the worker to do the detailing required.

So, I think you probably need to look at what the "experts" are saying either by checking out all the relevant research and any other publications and/or bring in the right "expert" who might be an occupational hygienist who can demonstrate experience of looking at comparable scenarios.

May be there are technical papers published by whoever represents the likes of monumental masons at national or international level - it is very difficult to envisage your scenario as being unique!

I presume that it is a given that the workers need eye protection, so with or without RPE, there are likely to be issues with the eye protection being splashed - may be part of the solution is to look at the method by which the process is kept damp - could be as simple as changing the direction of water suppression to help take most of the splashback away from the operative.

BUT, the artisan here is likely to have their eyes further away from the workpiece, so may be eye protection that does not double up as RPE might be less prone to vision problems.......so, possibly that RPE is NOT reasaonably practicable (since assessing one half of the equation - the "cost" involves taking account of the "effort" or in Plain English, hassle) - I don't know and am not the expert to make a proper judgement!

One of the possible issues might be where the work is done. Imagine one of those stonemasons who spends years and years restoring medieval cathedrals - it might be that it is inherently safer to remove the ornate stonework to a workshop than to do the work in situ.

Good luck, Peter