Home / LEV Testing / Guide
LEV testing - new machinery
New machinery is exciting - more capacity, a new capability, better kit. But a new machine or process can also bring new airborne hazards, and with them new duties: reassessing the risk, providing extraction that controls it, and adding that system to the ones you keep tested. New equipment does not just sit alongside your LEV obligations; it can change them.
The short answer
Bringing in new machinery can change your LEV obligations because a new machine or process may introduce a new airborne hazard - or more of an existing one - that has to be controlled. The duty is to assess the risk from the new process, and if it releases something hazardous, to control exposure, which often means providing LEV. That new extraction then becomes part of what you must keep thoroughly examined and tested on its cycle. So new equipment can trigger a fresh risk assessment, the provision of new or extended extraction, and the addition of another system to your testing regime. It is not enough to install the machine and carry on as before.
New machinery, new hazards
When a business brings in new machinery, the focus is naturally on what it can do - the capacity or capability it adds. But a new machine or process can also change the airborne hazards in the workplace. It might introduce a hazard that was not there before: a new material that produces dust, a process that generates fume, a substance that gives off vapour. Or it might add to an existing hazard - more of the same dust, a heavier load on the air than before. Either way, the risk picture is not the same as it was before the machine arrived.
This is the point that is easy to miss in the excitement of new kit: the hazard assessment that applied before may no longer be complete. A workshop that had its airborne risks understood and controlled can, with one new machine, have a new or increased exposure that nothing currently controls. The new machine does not announce this - it just does its job, releasing whatever it releases into the air. So recognising that new machinery can change the hazards, and therefore the duties, is the starting point. The obligations follow the risk, and new equipment can move the risk.
The duty to assess and control
Where a new process introduces or increases an airborne hazard, the duty is clear: assess the risk it presents, and control exposure to any substance hazardous to health. The assessment comes first - understanding what the new machine releases, how much, and who is exposed - because that determines what control is needed. This is not optional or a formality; controlling exposure to hazardous substances is a legal duty, and it applies to the new process just as it did to the existing ones. A new machine that releases something hazardous brings that duty with it.
Controlling the exposure, where the hazard warrants it, often means providing local exhaust ventilation to capture the contaminant at source. So a new machine can mean new extraction: a hood and ducting to serve it, either as a new system or as an extension of an existing one. The important thing is that the control is matched to the actual hazard the new process presents - which is why the assessment matters first. You cannot simply assume the existing extraction covers the new machine, or that no control is needed; the new risk has to be assessed and then controlled to the extent it requires. New capability comes with the duty to control any new hazard it brings.
A new system to keep tested
If a new machine brings new LEV, that extraction becomes part of what you must keep thoroughly examined and tested. LEV controlling a health hazard has to be examined and tested by a competent person on its cycle, and a newly installed system is no exception - it joins the systems already in your testing regime. So the obligation does not end at installing the extraction; it continues as an ongoing duty to keep the new system tested, just like the rest. A new machine can therefore add a line to your compliance schedule that was not there before.
There is also a starting point to get right: new LEV should be commissioned when installed, establishing that it performs as intended and setting the benchmark its future tests are measured against. So a new system properly brought into service has its performance confirmed at the outset and then maintained through the regular examination cycle. The practical upshot is that new machinery with new extraction adds to your testing obligations in an ongoing way - not just a one-off installation but a new system to commission, maintain and re-test on its schedule. Building that into the plan when the machine is bought avoids the new extraction being overlooked when the testing rounds come.
Extending existing extraction
Sometimes the new machine is served not by a wholly new system but by extending existing extraction - adding a branch to the current system to reach it. This might seem to sidestep the question of a new system, but it changes the existing one, and that matters in two ways. First, as with any addition to a balanced system, the new branch draws airflow from the others, so the existing hoods can lose capture unless the system is rebalanced - the extension has to be designed and checked, not just bolted on. Second, the modified system needs its performance re-confirmed, because it is no longer the system that was last tested.
So whether the new machine gets its own system or a tie-in to the existing one, the extraction has to be assessed and confirmed for the new configuration. A tie-in is not a way to avoid the obligations - it brings its own, because it alters a system that was balanced and tested for a different arrangement. The safe assumption is that new machinery affecting the airborne hazards means the extraction needs attention: assessing the new risk, providing or extending control, and confirming and maintaining the result through testing. The machine and its extraction are a package, and the LEV obligations are part of that package, not an afterthought.
The takeaway
New machinery can change your LEV obligations because a new machine or process may bring a new airborne hazard, or more of an existing one, that has to be controlled. The duty is to assess the risk the new process presents and, where it releases something hazardous, to control exposure - which often means providing LEV. That new or extended extraction then joins the systems you must keep thoroughly examined and tested on their cycle.
So new equipment can trigger a fresh risk assessment, the provision or extension of extraction, the commissioning of a new system, and an ongoing addition to your testing regime - even a tie-in to existing extraction alters a balanced, tested system and brings its own obligations. The trap is installing the machine and carrying on as before, assuming the extraction is unaffected. The obligations follow the risk, and new machinery can move the risk - so a new machine is a reason to look again at what your extraction has to do, and prove it does it.
Questions
A new machine or process may introduce a new airborne hazard, or more of an existing one. That triggers the duty to assess the new risk and control exposure where the process releases something hazardous - often by providing LEV, which then joins the systems you must keep tested.
Where the new process may affect the airborne hazards, yes. The assessment comes first, because it determines what control is needed - understanding what the machine releases, how much, and who is exposed. The existing assessment may no longer be complete once a new process is added.
Not always - it depends on what the assessment finds. If the process releases something hazardous, exposure must be controlled, which often means LEV, either a new system or an extension of an existing one. But the control must be matched to the actual hazard, which is why the assessment matters first.
Yes. LEV controlling a health hazard must be thoroughly examined and tested on its cycle, and a newly installed system is no exception - it joins your testing regime as an ongoing duty. New LEV should also be commissioned at installation to confirm it performs as intended and set its benchmark.
A tie-in still changes things. The new branch draws airflow from the existing hoods, so they can lose capture unless the system is rebalanced - it has to be designed and checked, not just bolted on. And the modified system needs its performance re-confirmed, because it is no longer the system that was last tested.
That is the trap. New machinery affecting the airborne hazards means the extraction needs attention - assessing the new risk, providing or extending control, and confirming and maintaining it through testing. The obligations follow the risk, and new equipment can move the risk, so it is a reason to look again.
Brought in new machinery? Our thorough examination confirms the extraction serving it - new system or extended - is genuinely controlling the hazard and takes its place in your testing regime.
