Local Exhaust Ventilation Testing for GB Employers: Compare Scope

Commission a statutory thorough examination and test that assesses contaminant capture during representative operation, compares measurements with a suitable design baseline and records defects and follow-up—not merely a service visit or generic airflow reading.[1][2][3]

Keep cleaning, servicing, filter replacement, repairs and post-repair verification as separate quotation lines unless the provider expressly includes them.[3][4]

Give the examiner the process and design baseline

Provide a schedule of each contaminant-generating process, its location, how it operates and whether it produces dust, mist, fume, vapour or aerosol. Source behaviour in the workplace affects LEV design and performance.[2]

• Map the hoods: identify the source served by each hood, the intended work position and the operator’s working method. For capture hoods, include the documented maximum working distance.[2]
• Provide the design baseline: send the commissioning report, user manual, intended performance benchmarks, parts-replacement schedules and system logbook. Commissioning results provide the reference for assessing future performance.[2][4]
• Add the operating history: include the previous examination report and outstanding actions, maintenance, filter-replacement and repair records, operating instructions and relevant risk assessment.[3]

Disclose missing commissioning or design information before quotation because it affects how performance can be assessed.[3] Ask the examiner to state the assessment basis, assumptions and limitations rather than substituting a generic airflow benchmark; no single benchmark suits every hood and process.[2][3]

Specify evidence of capture during representative operation

The quotation should require observation of the LEV while the process operates representatively, using the normal contaminant source, hood position and working method—not merely with the fan switched on.[2][3] The examination is intended to assess whether the system continues to perform as intended and contributes to adequate exposure control.[2]

• Capture evidence: require a record of whether the contaminant cloud is contained, captured or received by the hood and conducted away, including observed escape.[2][3]
• Measurements: require suitable airflow and pressure readings compared with the system’s intended benchmark.[3] A generic face-velocity result does not demonstrate control for every hood and process.[3]
• Process-specific methods: HSE says welding LEV should be judged by effective fume capture, not airflow measurements alone, and capture-velocity measurement is unsuitable for on-torch extraction.[1] Visible fume, a dust lamp for appropriate TIG applications or safely obtained video may support qualitative assessment.[1]

Require the report to combine observations, measurements, benchmark comparisons, limitations, defects and proposed actions.[2][3] These are contractual requirements rather than confirmed mandatory report headings. Records should state what was checked; a tick box should not imply that an assessment or measurement occurred when it did not.[3]

Separate the examination from maintenance work

Name the statutory thorough examination and test as a distinct deliverable in the quotation.[1][3]

• List routine user checks separately and mark them as included, optional or excluded.[3][4]
• Do the same for cleaning, servicing, filter replacement and repairs. COSHH requires control measures to remain efficient, operational, in good repair and clean.[1]
• State whether repairs may be completed during the visit and who may authorise chargeable work.[3][4]
• Confirm whether post-repair performance verification, an updated report and a completed-action record are included or separately priced.[3]

Routine checks remain important but should be kept distinct from the formal examination. Set their frequency from the user manual, system use and risk assessment rather than assuming one monthly schedule suits every check.[3]

Turn defects into documented follow-up

For each defect, request the affected system or hood reference, supporting observation or measurement, corrective action, responsible person, target date and confirmation of completion.[3]

Damage, escaping dust or fumes, abnormal indicator readings and other performance concerns should be reported promptly rather than left until the next examination.[3] The employer should review the controls needed before affected work continues and document repairs and subsequent performance checks.[3]

• Record what was repaired, when and by whom.[3]
• Document the subsequent performance check to show whether the corrective work restored the intended result.[3]
• Confirm whether the examiner will close completed actions and whether verification requires a separate order.[3]

Ask the provider to define any ratings used. The cited pages do not establish a universal pass/fail method, defect-severity classification or complete set of mandatory report headings.

Verify the examiner’s competence

Ask who will conduct and sign off the examination, then request evidence of that person’s knowledge, practical skills and relevant experience with the process, contaminant, hood and system type. Premier LEV’s guidance says a training certificate alone does not establish competence.[3]

• Check relevant evidence: request qualifications, recent comparable work, professional memberships, case studies and references.[2]
• Understand IP601: BOHS describes IP601 as a Level 4 qualification for people testing and maintaining LEV. Its assessment has four parts that must be passed within 12 months: a practical assessment, written theory examination, written practical examination and two workplace reports.[5]
• Clarify roles: Premier LEV says a competent examiner may be internal or external, while trained employees may undertake routine observations and operational monitoring.[3]

Where records cannot adequately show the process or system layout, invite shortlisted contractors to visit before accepting a tender.[2]

Compare Premier LEV and Plant and Safety

Premier LEV

• Examination scope and capture evidence: Premier LEV says it supports UK workplaces with testing, servicing and repairs. Its checklist calls for representative-process assessment supported by suitable airflow and pressure measurements.[3]
• Examiner competence and independence: its page refers to BOHS P601 training, while the BOHS qualification page names IP601 and also mentions the UK P601 course.[3][5] Verify the proposed examiner’s credentials and relevant experience.
• Reporting, defect follow-up and retest administration: its checklist covers defect follow-up and confirmation that corrective actions have been completed.[3]

Plant and Safety

• Examination scope and capture evidence: Plant and Safety describes visual inspection of components, airflow and duct-velocity measurements, functional hood and filter testing, and assessment against design standards.[6]
• Examiner competence and independence: it says its engineers are BOHS P601-qualified and its testing operation is independent of system designers, installers and maintenance providers.[6]
• Reporting, defect follow-up and retest administration: it claims to provide comprehensive reports and compliance guidance through a secure inspection database with automated retest reminders.[6]

Unknown from the cited pages are Premier LEV’s report format, automated reminders and testing independence, and Plant and Safety’s arrangements for post-repair verification.[3][6] Neither page provides independent evidence of service outcomes.[3][6]

Compare quotations on the same scope

Give each bidder the same process description, site drawing, system list, available records and required deliverables. Seek more than one tender and request a site visit where the scope cannot be established remotely.[2][3] Ask each bidder to explain how its proposed work aligns with HSG258, including relevant criteria for velocities, duct design, filters and fans.[2]

Compare each quotation on:

• review of commissioning information and previous records;
• assessment during representative operation;
• airflow and pressure measurements;
• evidence of effective contaminant capture;
• report detail and defect handling;
• post-repair performance verification; and
• retest administration.[2][3]

What to confirm with each provider

The cited Premier LEV and Plant and Safety pages do not state prices, VAT treatment, minimum or travel charges, quotation validity, payment or cancellation terms, contract duration, retest prices, warranties or response times; Premier LEV states UK coverage without regional detail, while Plant and Safety gives no specific service area.[3][6]

• total price, VAT and additional charges;
• quotation validity and payment terms;
• cancellation terms and contract duration;
• retest pricing and warranties;
• response-time commitments;
• coverage for the site location; and
• which maintenance, repair and verification work is included.

Set the repeat-test date for the actual process

In Great Britain, HSE says LEV must be thoroughly examined and tested at least every 14 months;[1] AMPM’s compliance summary attributes this requirement to COSHH Regulation 9(2).[4] Treat 14 months as a maximum: the same summary says Schedule 4 of COSHH sets shorter intervals for certain processes and reports HSE guidance that more frequent testing may be needed where wear could reduce performance sooner.[4]

Do not infer a six- or twelve-month legal interval solely from references to wood dust or isocyanates; check whether the actual process falls within Schedule 4.[3] The cited pages do not provide the complete Schedule 4 process list and intervals.[4]

Require the quotation and final report to state the next examination date and the reason for it. Plant and Safety advertises automated reminders,[6] but the employer still needs to establish the appropriate interval for the process.[1][4]

References

1. Maintenance, examination and testing of LEV and RPE – HSE (hse.gov.uk)
2. LEV (local exhaust ventilation) | Health and Safety Executive for Northern Ireland, controlling risk together (hseni.gov.uk)
3. Local Exhaust Ventilation Inspection Checklist: What Every Employer Should Know — PREMIER LEV (premierlev.com)
4. How often does LEV need a thorough examination? | AMPM (ampm.co.uk)
5. Thorough Examination and Testing of Local Exhaust Ventilation Systems IP601 – British Occupational Hygiene Society (BOHS) (bohs.org)
6. What Is COSHH – and How Does Local Exhaust Ventilation (LEV) Inspection and Testing Help You Comply? (plantandsafety.co.uk, 2025)