About 75% of the 238,000 carpenters and joiners employed in the woodworking sector are in micro-businesses with fewer than 10 employees.
"As only a fairly small proportion of firms are member of a trade association it has been difficult in the past for HSE to engage with the woodworking industry," said HSE inspector Cliff Seymour.
However, this situation has improved. Working with members of the Wood Safety Group, the HSE has developed its woodworking website and made it more suited to smaller businesses. It is now one of HSE’s top 10 most popular sites.
It also launched a woodworking e-bulletin that currently has over 18,000 subscribers a month, with this total increasing by several hundred each month.
"Although there have been improvements in woodworking safety issues, with the number of reported injuries continuing to fall, the health risks associated with the inhalation of dust from softwood and hardwood continue to be underestimated and are often poorly controlled," said Mr Seymour. "This is despite wood dusts being a cause of occupational asthma and other respiratory problems."
To try to improve wood dust control the HSE began an inspection programme at woodworking premises in April 2013.
Between April and November 2013 inspectors visited 1,204 woodworking premises and found that there were low levels of compliance with the Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations 2002 (COSHH).
Over this period 456 Improvement Notices were issued and 221 of these were for COSHH issues. Analysis of the COSHH Notices found that around three-quarters were for not having either a COSHH assessment or a local exhaust ventilation (LEV) thorough examination and test certificate.
Between October 2012, when the HSE’s Fee for Intervention commenced, and the end of July 2013 – the latest figures available – 851 invoices were issued at woodworking premises. The total charges were more than £330,000.
Over recent years, the HSE has brought a number of prosecutions against employers for failing to control the risks from wood dust.
Most recently a London joinery and shopfitter was fined £24,000 for safety failings, including failing to test the LEV system and not having suitable respiratory equipment in spraying operations.
Another case involved two brothers who were fined for putting workers at risk of developing asthma at a Tameside fencing manufacturer. They had no thorough examination and test report for their LEV system even though they knew one was required.
They had received Improvement Notices two years earlier and arranged for their LEV system to be tested but failed to make sure that this testing continued.
A Southampton-based decking company was fined £27,000 and ordered to pay costs of £25,000 for failing to control the risks from exposure to wood dust from western red cedar and isocyanate-based glues over a number of years. The LEV was found to be inadequate to control exposure.
Effective LEV system
Mr Seymour said an effective LEV system should be capable of capturing and removing the dust at source before it can spread. Systems must be correctly designed, maintained and used. The design of the system should take into account the number and type of machines to be connected to the LEV, plus the workshop layout.
To ensure effective dust capture, the correct volume flow rate (VFR) of air at each machine connection should always be used.
And when the LEV system is first installed it must be commissioned to prove that control has been achieved.
"Fitting air flow indicators will help to show that control continues to be effective during use," said Mr Seymour.
"A correctly calibrated air flow indicator is currently the only method that will show you immediately if there is a problem such as incorrect flow adjustment, blockage or damage to ducting."
Ensuring extraction is examined by a competent person at least every 14 months is also a legal requirement.
"However, we know from the number of Improvement Notices issued that this requirement is often not met," said Mr Seymour.
Workers should be educated on the risks associated with wood dust, and trained on how to use LEV and other control measures properly, including, for example, appropriate cleaning processes or the use of Respiratory Protective Equipment (RPE).
When cleaning up, either vacuum equipment meeting at least dust class M (medium hazard) classification or hose connected to the extraction system should be used.
RPE should complement other control measures such as LEV, while FFP3 masks should be used for high levels of wood dust.
Health surveillance should be introduced to detect adverse health effects to employees early on. For most woods, a low-level surveillance questionnaire is adequate.
A higher level of surveillance, including lung function testing, is needed for exposures to high risk woods such as western red cedar, a known asthmagen.
Hardwood dust is a potential cause of nasal cancer (about 50 cases a year reported) and the EU is currently proposing to reduce the hardwood dust exposure limit of 5mg/m³ down to 3mg/m³. The latest estimate is that this change could take place in early 2015.
