Tim Ward

Noise and kerbside glass collection: 

Noise and kerbside glass collection Tim Ward HM Principal Specialist Inspector (Noise & Vibration)

Overview: 

Overview Background Levels of noise exposure found (and consequences for employers) Understanding the problem Personal hearing protection The way forward

Background: 

Background Noise raised as issue by HSE inspector carrying out audits of LA waste collection Two LAs visited to provide advice on compliance with Noise regulations, including making estimate of noise exposure Exposures found to be high: (1) LEP,d 96-100 dB, (2) LEP,d 91-92 dB Poor compliance with requirements on noise exposure control and hearing protection Decided issue needed further investigation

Current knowledge of noise risks: 

Current knowledge of noise risks ‘Kerbsider’ collection vehicle. Glass only, no sorting LEP,d 96-100 dB, Maximum LCpeak 125 dB 340 – 1000 crates per collector per day. Rapid working observed ‘Kerbsider’ collection vehicle. Glass only, collected to slave wheelie bins, no sorting LEP,d 91-92 dB, Maximum LCpeak 137 dB 200 – 250 crates per collector per day. Operator technique varied ‘Kerbsider’ collection vehicle. Glass only, sorted at skip LEP,d 97 dB, Maximum LCpeak 143 dB 166 crates per collector per day

Current knowledge of noise risks: 

Current knowledge of noise risks ‘Kerbsider’ collection vehicle. Glass, plastic and cans collected together. Sorted at vehicle LEP,d 83 dB, Maximum LCpeak 135 dB ‘Kerbsider’ collection vehicle. Glass, plastic, cans, paper collected together. Sorted at vehicle LEP,d 91-92 dB, Max LCpeak 133 dB (No information on working method) LEP,d 94 dB, Maximum LCpeak 131 dB Estimated 340 crates per collector per shift

Current knowledge of noise risks: 

Current knowledge of noise risks (No information on working method) LEP,d 86 dB From dutyholder’s noise assessment Collection and sorting at in-vehicle stillages LEP,d 87 dB, Maximum LCpeak 134 dB Consultant’s report “Collecting the glass recycling receptacles and placing them in the bin lift and then allowing it to empty in the hopper” LEP,d 106 dB, Maximum LCpeak 138 dB Dutyholder’s noise assessment

Consequences of evident noise risks: 

Consequences of evident noise risks Noise exposures exceed 85 dB upper action value, under Control of Noise at Work Regulations 2005 employers should Eliminate risk from noise, or reduce to as low as reasonably practicable (ALARP) Reduce exposure to ALARP (technical/organisational means, not hearing protection) Take immediate action to reduce exposure below 87 dB exposure limit (hearing protection allowed) Provide hearing protection, ensure it is worn when required Health surveillance for exposed employees Information, instruction and training for employees

Initial thoughts: 

Initial thoughts Large range of noise exposure, factors could include Working practices, e.g. Speed # operatives Collection/sorting method, e.g. mixed/single waste type sort/no sort at vehicle type of vehicle

Understanding the problem: 

Understanding the problem Trials carried out under controlled conditions Filling technique Trough lining (polyurethane) Source of noise: glass-trough or glass-glass Carried out at premises of Terberg Matec Ltd., Worksop

Understanding the problem: 

Understanding the problem Emerging findings from trials at Terberg Rapid tip is worst technique, polyurethane lining makes no difference Single bottle (sorting) as noisy as rapid tip, polyurethane lining reduces by 1-2 dB Slower/controlled tip is quietest, polyurethane lining reduces by further 2 dB Airborne glass-glass noise dominates

Who needs a noise control engineer?: 

Who needs a noise control engineer? One Borough Council reports success in modifying collection vehicle Troughs lined with ‘astroturf’ underlay Hinged flap over aperture 4-5 dB reduction in exposure achieved

Initial thoughts on solutions: 

Initial thoughts on solutions Noise exposures likely to be reduced by considering, in combination ‘Good practice’ working methods e.g. operator technique, task rotation ‘Good practice’ collection/sorting methods mixed collections, collection methods, sorting methods (where, when) Vehicle / collection system design Machinery designed to minimise noise emissions during foreseeable use, information on residual risk and safe use provided (Supply of Machinery (Safety) Regulations 1992)

Personal hearing protection: 

Personal hearing protection Needed where exposures exceed 85 dB (daily exposure) or 137 dB (peak) Limit values are being exceeded in some cases – so either use hearing protection, modify the work, or cease the work! Hearing protection can cause additional risks when working around moving vehicles/highways Communications Warning signals Isolation

Considerations on hearing protection: 

Considerations on hearing protection Organise work so that need to wear hearing protection in higher safety risk situations is eliminated Target hearing protection at noisy activities only (don’t require it to be worn all day) Consider and select appropriate hearing protection Organise work to allow employees to don/doff hearing protection as necessary Systems of work/information, instruction and training/supervision/monitoring Hearing can & must be protected

Types of hearing protection: 

Types of hearing protection ‘Amplitude dependent’ earmuffs/plugs Electronic (usually) Allow passage of lower level sounds, cut-out higher level sounds - e.g. short duration impact sounds e.g. 3M 1520/1525, Sordin-MSA Basic line Cut-off, Peltor Tactical, JSP Classic Electronic, Bilsom Impact, EAR Ultra 9000 (non-electronic), EAR Combat Arms (plug, non-electronic)

Types of hearing protection: 

Types of hearing protection ‘Flat attenuation’ earmuffs/earplugs aim minimise distortion of sounds, decrease the sense of isolation and generally allow wearer to distinguish important sounds and warning signals e.g. Bilsom NST Clarity (earmuffs), EAR Ultratech (earplugs)

The way forward: 

The way forward Immediate action Employees’ hearing at risk now - protect it as required by regulations WISH Glass Collection Noise working group constituted identify what constitutes good practice, and practicalities – sharing of experience HSE will continue to work with the industry to identify means to reduce noise exposure – quick fixes and longer-term Noise exposure must be played in when decisions are made on recycling collection strategies