Home / LEV Testing / Guide
LEV testing - new machines
A new machine or process brings new hazards - and possibly new hazardous substances, dust or fume. Risk-assessing it before it runs means identifying those hazards, working out who could be harmed and how, deciding the controls needed (which may include extraction), and putting them in place before people are exposed. Here is how to approach risk-assessing a new machine or process. This is general information, not a substitute for competent health-and-safety advice.
The short answer
Bringing in a new machine, or starting a new process, is exactly the point at which to think about the risks - before it runs, not after something goes wrong. A new machine or process can introduce new hazards, including new hazardous substances (dust, fume, vapour) that need controlling. Risk-assessing it properly, up front, is how you make sure the controls are in place before anyone is exposed. Here's how to approach it. This is general information, not a substitute for competent health-and-safety advice. Step 1: Identify the hazards. Start by identifying all the hazards the new machine or process brings - everything about it that could cause harm. This includes the obvious mechanical hazards (moving parts, etc.), noise, heat, and so on - but crucially, for the purposes of extraction and COSHH, it includes any hazardous substances the machine or process produces or uses: dust (from cutting, grinding, sanding), fume (from heat on metal), mist (from spraying or machining a liquid), vapour or gas (from a chemical). A new process very often introduces a new airborne hazard - so ask specifically: does this machine or process create a dust, fume, mist, vapour or gas that people could breathe? If so, that's a hazardous substance needing a COSHH assessment. Step 2: Work out who could be harmed and how. Then work out who could be harmed and how. Who is exposed - the operator, and others working nearby (the airborne contaminant can affect people beyond the operator)? And how could they be harmed - breathing a fume or dust, skin contact with a substance, and so on? This defines the exposure you need to control: which people, to what, by what route. Step 3: Evaluate and decide controls (the hierarchy). Evaluate the risk and decide the controls needed, following the hierarchy of control. The hierarchy means preferring higher-level controls: first, can the hazard be eliminated or reduced at source (a less hazardous material, a method that makes less dust or fume, enclosing the process)? Then, engineering controls - notably local exhaust ventilation (LEV) to capture a dust, fume or other airborne contaminant at source before people breathe it. Then, lower down, safe systems of work and, last, RPE (respiratory protection) for residual exposure. So for a new machine producing an airborne hazard, the assessment typically concludes that LEV is needed to capture it - and that conclusion has to be acted on before the machine runs. Step 4: Put the controls in place before it runs. This is the key point: put the controls in place before the machine or process runs, not after. The whole value of assessing up front is that the controls are ready before anyone is exposed - so no one is exposed to an uncontrolled risk while you 'sort out the extraction later'. For new LEV specifically, this means it should be designed for the process, installed, and commissioned before the process goes into regular use. Commissioning is the test done when LEV is new - confirming it works as designed and recording its benchmark (its performance figures for future tests to measure against). So a new process needing extraction should have that extraction designed, installed and commissioned as part of bringing the process in - not bolted on afterwards. Step 5: Record, inform and train. Record the risk assessment (and the COSHH assessment for any hazardous substance), so the assessment and its conclusions are documented. And inform and train the people who'll operate the machine or work nearby: what the risks are, and how to use the controls properly (positioning and switching on the LEV, wearing any RPE, following the safe system of work). Controls only protect if they're used, so the people have to know how. Step 6: Review it. Finally, review the assessment - especially as the new process beds in (real-world use can reveal things the assessment missed), if the process changes, or periodically. A new process is often not fully understood until it's been running a while, so the assessment shouldn't be a one-off. And the LEV, once commissioned, goes on to need regular thorough examination and testing (typically at least every fourteen months) through its life. The common failure to avoid. The common failure is bringing in a new machine and only thinking about the extraction (and the exposure) afterwards - or not at all - by which point people have already been exposed to an uncontrolled hazard, and the extraction is a costly, awkward retrofit rather than a planned part of the installation. Assessing up front avoids this: the hazard is identified, the control decided and installed, and the people protected, before the machine runs. This connects to the how-new-machinery-changes-your-lev-obligations page. The takeaway. So risk-assessing a new machine or process means: identify the hazards (including any hazardous substances); work out who could be harmed and how; evaluate the risk and decide the controls using the hierarchy (with LEV for airborne hazards); put the controls in place - designed, installed and commissioned - before the machine runs; record the assessment and inform and train the people; and review it. The heart of it is assessing and controlling before it runs, so no one is exposed to an uncontrolled new hazard. This is general information, not competent health-and-safety advice. This is general information.
Key points
Identify the hazards
Start by identifying all the hazards the new machine or process brings - everything about it that could cause harm. This includes the obvious ones (moving parts, noise, heat, and so on), but crucially, for extraction and COSHH, it includes any hazardous substances the machine or process produces or uses: dust (from cutting, grinding, sanding), fume (from heat on metal), mist (from spraying or machining a liquid), vapour or gas (from a chemical).
A new process very often introduces a new airborne hazard, which is easy to overlook when focusing on the machine's mechanical safety. So ask specifically: does this machine or process create a dust, fume, mist, vapour or gas that people could breathe? If it does, that's a hazardous substance needing a COSHH assessment and, likely, controls to capture it. Identifying the airborne hazard at this stage is what triggers the whole exposure-control side of the assessment - miss it, and the extraction never gets considered. So identify the hazards - including any hazardous substances - is the first step, and the one that catches the airborne risk a new machine may bring. Who it could harm is next. So spot every hazard, especially any dust or fume. This is general information, not competent health-and-safety advice. This is general information.
Who could be harmed, and evaluate the risk
Then work out who could be harmed and how. Who is exposed - the operator, and others working nearby (an airborne contaminant can affect people well beyond the operator)? And how could they be harmed - breathing a fume or dust, skin contact with a substance, and so on? This defines the exposure to control: which people, to what, by what route.
Then evaluate the risk and decide the controls, following the hierarchy of control - preferring higher-level controls. First, can the hazard be eliminated or reduced at source (a less hazardous material, a method that makes less dust or fume, enclosing the process)? Then engineering controls - notably local exhaust ventilation (LEV) to capture a dust, fume or other airborne contaminant at source before people breathe it. Then, lower down, safe systems of work and, last, RPE for residual exposure. So for a new machine producing an airborne hazard, the assessment typically concludes that LEV is needed to capture it. So who could be harmed, and evaluate the risk - then decide controls by the hierarchy - is the core assessing step: define the exposure, then choose controls, with LEV the key engineering control for airborne hazards. Acting on that before the machine runs is next. So decide the controls needed, LEV included, by the hierarchy. This is general information, not competent health-and-safety advice. This is general information.
Put controls in place before it runs
This is the key point: put the controls in place before the machine or process runs, not after. The whole value of assessing up front is that the controls are ready before anyone is exposed - so no one breathes an uncontrolled dust or fume while you 'sort out the extraction later'. The assessment's conclusions have to be acted on before the process goes live, or the assessment hasn't protected anyone.
For new LEV specifically, this means it should be designed for the process, installed, and commissioned before the process goes into regular use. Commissioning is the test done when LEV is new: it confirms the system works as designed and records its benchmark - the performance figures that future thorough examinations will measure against (covered in the commissioning-versus-thorough-examination page). So a new process needing extraction should have that extraction designed, installed and commissioned as part of bringing the process in - planned in from the start, not bolted on afterwards. This is far better (and cheaper, and more effective) than a retrofit, and it means the process runs controlled from day one. So put controls in place before it runs - design, install and commission the LEV first - is the crucial action: the controls, especially LEV, ready and proven before exposure. Recording, training and review follow. So have the extraction in and commissioned before running. This is general information, not competent health-and-safety advice. This is general information.
Record, inform and train
Record the risk assessment - and the COSHH assessment for any hazardous substance the machine or process involves - so the assessment, the hazards identified, and the controls decided are documented. A recorded assessment is both a legal expectation (for significant risks) and a practical reference: it captures what was decided and why, and can be reviewed and updated.
And inform and train the people who'll operate the machine or work nearby: what the risks are, and how to use the controls properly - positioning and switching on the LEV, wearing any RPE correctly, following the safe system of work. Controls only protect people if they're actually used and used correctly, so the people have to understand them. A well-designed control that the operator doesn't know how to use (or use) doesn't protect them. So the human side - informing and training - is part of making the controls effective, not an afterthought. So record, inform and train - document it, and equip the people - completes the setting-up: the assessment recorded, and the people equipped to work safely with the new machine. Reviewing it is the last step. So write it down and train the people to use the controls. This is general information, not competent health-and-safety advice. This is general information.
Review it, and avoid the common failure
Finally, review the assessment - especially as the new process beds in (real-world use can reveal exposures or issues the assessment missed), if the process changes, or periodically. A new process is often not fully understood until it's been running a while, so the assessment shouldn't be a one-off; it should be revisited as you learn how the process really behaves. And the LEV, once commissioned, goes on to need regular thorough examination and testing (typically at least every fourteen months) through its whole life, to confirm it keeps working.
The common failure to avoid is bringing in a new machine and only thinking about the extraction (and the exposure) afterwards - or not at all - by which point people have already been exposed to an uncontrolled hazard, and the extraction is a costly, awkward retrofit rather than a planned part of the installation. Assessing up front avoids this entirely: the hazard is identified, the control decided and installed and commissioned, and the people protected, before the machine ever runs. This is the whole point of risk-assessing a new machine or process (and it connects to the how-new-machinery-changes-your-lev-obligations page). So review it, and avoid the common failure - assess and control before running, not after - is the closing principle: make the assessment and the controls come first, and keep reviewing as the process settles. So assess first, control first, then review. This is general information, not competent health-and-safety advice. This is general information.
Questions
Before it runs - so the hazards are identified and the controls put in place before anyone is exposed; assessing up front means no one works with an uncontrolled new hazard, and any extraction can be designed, installed and commissioned as part of bringing the process in, not retrofitted later. A new machine or process should be risk-assessed before it runs - up front, as part of bringing it in - not after it's already operating. The reason is that the whole value of a risk assessment is to identify the hazards and put the controls in place before anyone is exposed. If you assess only after the machine is running, people have already been exposed to whatever uncontrolled hazard it brings (a new dust or fume, say) before anything was done about it. Assessing before it runs means: the hazards are identified (including any hazardous substance), the controls are decided (using the hierarchy of control), and those controls are in place and working before the process goes live - so no one is exposed to an uncontrolled risk. For any extraction needed, this means the LEV can be designed for the process, installed, and commissioned (tested when new) as part of the installation, rather than bolted on later as a costly, awkward retrofit. So the assessment (and the controls) come first, before the machine runs. So before it runs, so controls are ready before exposure. This is general information, not competent health-and-safety advice. This is general information.
All hazards it could cause - mechanical, noise, heat - but crucially any hazardous substances it produces or uses: dust, fume, mist, vapour or gas that people could breathe; a new process often introduces a new airborne hazard needing a COSHH assessment and controls, so ask specifically whether it creates one. In a new machine or process, look for all the hazards it could cause harm through - but pay particular attention to any hazardous substances, because these are easily overlooked when focusing on mechanical safety. The full picture includes: mechanical hazards (moving parts, and so on), noise, heat, and other physical hazards; and, crucially for extraction and COSHH, any hazardous substances the machine or process produces or uses - dust (from cutting, grinding, sanding), fume (from heat on metal), mist (from spraying or machining a liquid), vapour or gas (from a chemical). A new process very often introduces a new airborne hazard that people could breathe. So ask specifically: does this machine or process create a dust, fume, mist, vapour or gas that people could breathe? If so, that's a hazardous substance needing a COSHH assessment and likely controls (such as LEV) to capture it. Identifying the airborne hazard at this stage is what triggers the exposure-control side of the assessment - miss it, and the extraction never gets considered. So look for every hazard, especially any airborne substance. So all hazards, especially any dust, fume or vapour. This is general information, not competent health-and-safety advice. This is general information.
By following the hierarchy of control - first eliminate or reduce the hazard at source (less hazardous material or method), then engineering controls like LEV to capture airborne contaminants at source, then safe systems of work, and last RPE for residual exposure; for a new airborne hazard, LEV is usually the key control. You decide what controls a new process needs by following the hierarchy of control - which ranks controls by how effective and reliable they are, and prefers the higher ones. First, can the hazard be eliminated or reduced at source (using a less hazardous material, a method that makes less dust or fume, or enclosing the process)? Eliminating or reducing the hazard is best, because it tackles the problem at its root. Then, engineering controls - notably local exhaust ventilation (LEV) to capture a dust, fume or other airborne contaminant at source before people breathe it. LEV is the key engineering control for an airborne hazard, protecting everyone in the area. Then, lower down, safe systems of work (how the task is done) and administrative measures. And last, respiratory protection (RPE) for any residual exposure the higher controls don't fully handle - a backup, not a first resort. So for a new machine producing an airborne hazard, the assessment typically concludes that LEV is needed to capture it, backed by RPE where needed. Working through the hierarchy ensures you reach for the most effective controls first. So decide controls by working down the hierarchy, LEV for airborne hazards. So by the hierarchy of control, with LEV for airborne hazards. This is general information, not competent health-and-safety advice. This is general information.
Yes - new LEV should be designed for the process, installed, and commissioned (tested when new to confirm it works and record its benchmark) before the process goes into regular use, so the process is controlled from day one and there's a benchmark for future thorough examinations. Yes - new LEV should be commissioned before the process runs. When a new process needs extraction, the LEV should be designed for the process, installed, and commissioned as part of bringing the process in - before it goes into regular use. Commissioning is the test done when LEV is new: it confirms the system works as designed (that it's installed correctly and captures the contaminant as intended) and records its benchmark - the performance figures (airflows, capture velocities, pressures) that future thorough examinations will measure against. Doing this before the process runs matters for two reasons. First, it means the process is controlled from day one: people aren't exposed to an uncontrolled hazard while the extraction is 'sorted out later'. Second, it establishes the benchmark from the start, so the later thorough examinations (typically at least every fourteen months) have a firm reference to check the system's performance against. So a new process needing extraction should have that extraction designed, installed and commissioned as part of the installation - not bolted on afterwards. This is far better, cheaper and more effective than a retrofit. So yes - design, install and commission the LEV before running the process. So yes; commission it before the process goes live. This is general information, not competent health-and-safety advice. This is general information.
Bringing in the machine and only thinking about the extraction (and exposure) afterwards, or not at all - so people are exposed to an uncontrolled hazard before anything's done, and the extraction becomes a costly, awkward retrofit; assessing up front and installing the controls first avoids this. The common mistake with new machines and extraction is bringing in the machine and only thinking about the extraction - and the exposure it creates - afterwards, or not at all. This happens when the focus is on getting the machine installed and producing, with the airborne hazard it creates (a new dust or fume) overlooked or deferred. The consequences are twofold. First, people are exposed to an uncontrolled hazard before anything is done about it: they've been breathing the dust or fume while the extraction was an afterthought, which for a serious hazard (a sensitiser, a carcinogen) is a real risk. Second, the extraction becomes a costly, awkward retrofit - fitting extraction to an already-installed machine and workshop is harder, more disruptive and less effective than designing it in from the start. Assessing up front avoids both: the airborne hazard is identified in the risk (and COSHH) assessment, the extraction is decided, designed, installed and commissioned as part of bringing the machine in, and the people are protected from day one. So the mistake is treating extraction as an afterthought; the fix is assessing and installing the controls before the machine runs. So the mistake is leaving extraction until after the machine's running. So thinking about extraction only after the machine is in. This is general information, not competent health-and-safety advice. This is general information.
Yes - review it as the process beds in (real use can reveal what the assessment missed), if the process changes, and periodically; a new process often isn't fully understood until it's run a while, and any LEV also needs regular thorough examination and testing (typically at least every 14 months) through its life. Yes - the risk assessment needs reviewing after the process starts. A risk assessment isn't a one-off document to file and forget; it should be reviewed at several points. As the process beds in: real-world use can reveal exposures, behaviours or issues the initial assessment missed or underestimated, because a new process is often not fully understood until it's been running a while - so revisit the assessment once you've seen how it really behaves. If the process changes: any significant change (to the machine, the materials, the method, the layout) can change the risks, so the assessment should be updated. And periodically: as good practice, to keep it current. Reviewing ensures the assessment (and the controls) stay matched to the actual risk, rather than the risk as first assumed. Separately, any LEV installed to control an airborne hazard, once commissioned, needs regular thorough examination and testing (typically at least every fourteen months) through its whole life, to confirm it keeps working - so the control is verified over time as well as the assessment reviewed. So yes - review the assessment as the process settles, changes, and over time. So yes; review it as the process beds in and changes. This is general information, not competent health-and-safety advice. This is general information.
A new machine or process that produces dust or fume needs its extraction designed, installed and commissioned before it runs - and tested through its life after; we commission and thoroughly examine and test LEV, so a new process is controlled from day one and stays proven, as its risk assessment and COSHH require. Ask us about commissioning or testing your LEV. This is general information.
