LEV Inspection & Test Report

CLIENT:

XXXXXXX LTD

SITE: XXXXXXX

Report Reference: Flow Line Room-LEV

System Identification: SML Purex 1

Survey Conducted By:

Name: Position:

XXXXXX Environmental Consultant

Signed:

Visit Date: 8th December 2015

Issue Date:

December 2015

Assessment of Level of Control

Satisfactory

System: SML Purex 1

COSHH Reg. 9

Executive Summary:

At the request of Mr XXXX, Engineering Manager with XXXXX Ltd, XXXXXX Ltd were contracted to

conduct a thorough examination and test of the of the various Local Exhaust Ventilation (LEV) systems at

the XXXXX Ltd production facility at XXXXXX. Site works were undertaken on 7th & 8th December by

XXXXXX of XXXX Ltd without supervision. XXXXX is an Environmental Consultant with XXXXX Ltd.

This report covers the following system: SML Purex 1, located within the Flow Line Room in the Shop Floor

Assembly and Test area

The performance of the system was seen to be satisfactory. No improvement actions are recommended

this visit

System: SML Purex 1

COSHH Reg. 9

Introduction:

The site comprises a purpose built facility for the manufacture and testing of components to be used in the aerospace industry. The site was originally established in the 1940’s and has undergone extensive expansion and modernisation since opening. The LEV system is located in the shop floor assembly and test flow line room on the first floor of the building. The system is designed to remove the fume created from the manual soldering of parts onto printed circuit boards. Prior to soldering, the area of the board to be worked on is cleaned with Methyl Ethyl Ketone (MEK). The LEV is used during both the cleaning and soldering process with the captor hood positioned as close as is practice to the process (approximately 10-15cm). It is understood that the system is normally in use approximately 20 to 25 hours per week. System of Work: Site induction and walk round of the area was conducted with the engineering manager. The XXXXX Ltd LEV testing risk assessment document for the Flow Line Room was reviewed and seen not to require any amendments before works could start. A copy of this risk assessment is attached. It was not necessary to disable the fire alarm sounders during the survey. Findings and, recommendation resulting from the examination and test of the system were discussed with the engineering manager at the completion of the survey. Existing Records:

A LEV logbook for the system is located in the Engineering Department offices. This was reviewed and seen to contain a user manual for the system, initial examination and test report (dated November 2013), examination and test report (dated November 2014), Monthly system check sheets (signed off up to November 2015) and filter replacement records (filters currently replaced as and when required with last replacement dated October 2015)

System: SML Purex 1

COSHH Reg. 9

LOCAL EXHAUST VENTILATION PLANT – COSHH REG. 9 EXAMINATION AND TEST

1 Client:

XXXXX

2

System ID: SML Purex 1

Location: Shop Floor Assembly & Test

Flow Line Room

Process: Soldering of parts onto PCB

Initial thorough examination: No

3 Assessment of Level of Control: 4 Interval Between Routine Examinations:

Satisfactory At least once in 14 months

5 Date of Previous Examination and Test:

November 2014

6 Hazard(s) to be Controlled: * 7 Restrictions/Precautions: 8 Instruments Used & Ser. No.

Solder fumes Methyl Ethyl Ketone (MEK) Flux

Safety boots Testo 425 hot wire anemometer S/N 01425921 Safety glasses

9 Summary Action Plan

Item in LEV system

Action Required Priority* Person to take action

Target Date

Date Completed

Examiner name XXXXXX

Signature

Client name

Signature

Date: December 2015

I accept this report YES /NO

Date

*Priority – e.g. 1 = high, 2 = medium, 3 = routine Examiner: green boxes – Employer: yellow boxes

HOODS/ENCLOSURES System: SML Purex 1

COSHH Reg. 9

10(a)

Hood(s) Type/Description: Positionable captor hood (Circular hood face)

10(b)

Visual Examination Report: Hood in good condition with no visible damage. Hood seen to be clean with no

deposits observed

11 Hood

Open Area

Sash or Opening

ht.

Face Velocity Capture Distance Hood Static

Pressure

Volumetric Flow Rate Hood ID Actual Mean Measured Required

m2 m m/s m/s m m Pa m

3/h

SML

Purex 1

0.0079 5.10, 5.05,

5.90, 5.55,

5.00

5.32 0.26 0.10 to

0.15

151.3

Circular hood fitted with dimensions of – 0.10m diam.

Speed control is variable – test conducted on lowest speed

setting for unit

12 Date of Installation: November 2013 System Total Volume: m

3/h

13 No. of Hoods on System: 1 14 Process Conditions at Time of Test:

Max No. to be used at any time: 1 Not in process

15(a) Hood Static Pressure Gauges 15(b) Hood Pass/Fail Stickers

Fitted? No Fitted? Yes

16 Qualitative Containment Test Report: Method Used: Smoke Release Smoke test showed that up to a distance of 0.26m directly away from the hood face, capture of fume would be

achieved.

Whilst in use, the capture hood should be positioned as close as practicable to source, to ensure that

complete capture is achieved.

DUCTING System: SML Purex 1

COSHH Reg. 9

17(a) Type/Description: Stainless steel flexible duct arm 18 Visual Examination Report:

17(b) Air Temp in Ducts: - Ducting in good condition with no

damage noted. Ducting observed to

be clean with no deposits noted 17(c) Barometric Pressure:

19 Diameter/

Dimension Duct Area Static

Pressure Velocity

Pressures on

Traverse

Duct Velocity

Test Point ID

Actual Measured

Mean Transport Velocity

Duct Volume

Flow (mm) (m

2) (Pa) (Pa) (m/s) (m/s) (m

3/h)

Hood volume data

No test points in stainless steel positionable arm Total m3/h

20 Damper Settings: 21 Stack height (m) and Termination Type:

Damper fully open in normal during normal

operation

N/A

22 Fan Motor Data: 23 Filter/Air Cleaning Devices:

Make/Model Purex International Make/Model Purex F/Cube 1

Type Centrifugal Type

Volume Flow Volume Flow -

Static Pressure P Drop -

Motor 230v / 135W Filter Media HEPA / Chemical Filter

Rating / Current 50Hz / 0.6A Filter Cleaning As required

Function Check Monthly

Motor Speed Variable Monitoring Gauges etc. - Operational Check

No

Transmission Electrical

Rotation Direction Correct – anti-clockwise Recirculation of Filtered Air?

Yes

System: SML Purex 1

COSHH Reg. 9

24 Return of Exhaust Air to Workroom

Filter Efficiency Not assessed Measurement Technique

Static Pressure at Inlet, Pa Not assessed

Estimate of concentration of contaminant in returned air

Not assessed

Comments None

Recommendations and priority* None

* e.g. 1 = high, 2 = medium, 3 = routine

25 Make-up air

Adequate quantity Yes Measurement Technique

Induced draughts No

Comments None

Recommendations None

26 Alarms

Hood / enclosure No

Duct No

Air cleaner No

Air mover No

Returned air No

Comments None

Recommendations None

27 Statement of System Performance Specification:

Smoke test showed satisfactory capture of smoke up to 0.26m from hood face. Face velocities complied with

HSG 258 recommended 0.5-1.0m/s for welding, soldering and liquid transfer type processes. System is deemed

as providing satisfactory protection to operators.

The filter was examined and was seen to have light to moderate deposit build up. From discussions with staff it

is understood that the filter will be due to be changed in approximately 2 to 4 weeks,

Results were compared against the commissioning report and the November 2014 examination and test results.

Results were seen to be constant with results from prevouis reports

System: SML Purex 1

COSHH Reg. 9

28 Schematic Drawing of System

LEV Purex 1

Stainless steel

Coiled Spiral Duct

arm 0.04m Dia

Stainless steel

Cone circular Hood

0.10m Dia

Fan

Damper

Purex Filter Captor Hood

Filter

System: SML Purex 1

COSHH Reg. 9

29: Inspection Photographs

Inspection Photographs

SML Purex 1

Ductwork, seen to be in a satisfactory and clean condition

Capture hood, seen to be in a satisfactory and clean condition

Light to moderate build up on HEPA / Chemical filter

Approximate position of captor hood from process during normal operation of system

Motor confirmed running in correct direction (anticlockwise)

System: SML Purex 1

COSHH Reg. 9

30: Conclusions

Thorough examination and testing is currently undertaken a minimum of every fourteen months as required

Smoke release showed adequate contaminant capture for the system

Face velocities were seen to be above the recommended speed of 0.5-1.0m/s which ensures adequate contaminant capture for the system

The hood and duct work were inspected and were seen to be in a clean and satisfactory condition.

Light to moderate build up was observed to the HEPA / chemical filter.

The system logbook was available for inspection. This was reviewed and seen to contain all the relevant information necessary. All tasks seen to be completed and signed off by the relevant parties involved

31: Recommendations

Non arising from this visit

Pre Inspection Risk Assessment: XXXXX Ltd,

Client XXXXXX Ltd

Address XXXXXX

Department Flow Line Room

Hazard Applies Risk Control and Precautions Further Action Required Exposure to hazardous substances in Hinge Room

Yes Low risk. Client requested to ensure processes, where practicable, are not taking place during LEV examination and test Disposable overalls/PPE should be worn to protect normal clothing, where necessary. XXX Engineers fully trained in COSHH awareness procedures.

Follow procedures given in method statement and COSHH awareness guidelines.

Electrical hazards Yes Low Risk. Access not required to areas of equipment/machinery containing live electrics All testing equipment uses low voltage batteries.

None

Access and egress to working area

Yes Low Risk: XXXX Engineers made aware of client policy on access and egress during site induction.

If engineer deems access unsafe the task shall be halted and the Engineering Manager informed

Chemical hazards Yes Low Risk: No hazardous chemicals are used during survey but these may be present in the area of work. Appropriate PPE to be worn where necessary. XXX Engineers receive COSHH awareness training.

Check with client before commencing work if other activities in area create significant hazard. If so, follow specified precautions given in client’s COSHH assessment.

Noise Yes Low Risk: Process does not create significant noise level Noise created by survey activities is unlikely to be significant. Ear protection available if required to control noise exposure from plant activities. Noise meters and trained operators are available to carry out monitoring if required. XXXX Engineers receive noise awareness training

Check with client before commencing work if other activities in area create significant noise hazard. If so, follow specified precautions given in client’s noise assessment.

Manual handling Yes Low Risk: Survey tools and equipment are lightweight. Stepladders and ladders are suitable for carrying by one person unaided. Manual handling awareness training provided for XXX Engineers

Moving of plant or manufactured items to be undertaken by XXXXX Ltd employees

Mechanical

No Low Risk: Motor fan covered by guard. Guard does not need to be removed to check fan direction

None.

Fire Yes Low Risk: Follow site fire safety rules.

Check location of fire exits and escape routes before commencing work.

Cuts from sharp edges Yes Low Risk: Moving of plant or manufactured items to be undertaken by XXXXX Ltd employees Appropriate PPE to be worn where necessary.

Be aware of the risk of sharp edges, etc being present in survey area

Slips, Trips and Falls Yes Low Risk: XXXXX Ltd policy for all production areas to be kept clean and tidy

Engineering Manager to be informed if poor housekeeping observed

Assessment prepared by:

Name XXXXX Date: 08/12/15

Signature

Survey Team Name XXXXX

Date: 08/12/15

Signature

Before carrying out any task the engineer shall carry out a last minute risk assessment. Any hazards observed should be recorded overleaf

Last Minute Risk Assessment

Hazard Applies Risk Control and Precautions Further Action Required

Review/ Amendment by: Name

Date:

Signature