The Australian Standards

• Definitions
• General approach
• Use recommendations
• Fitting personal eye protection
• Developing the study

Australian Standards provide guidance for the selection of best practice. While few safety standards are made mandatory by governments, they form the basis for assessing acceptable practice in occupational settings. Two Australian Standards are relevant to this study: AS 1336:1982 (updated January 1997) Recommended Practices for Eye Protection in the Industrial Environments and AS 1337:1992 Eye Protectors for Industrial Applications. The former details strategies for reducing eye injuries and the choice of personal eye protection for various tasks. The latter deals with standards for the construction, testing and marking of personal eye protection. The major parts of the standards relevant to this study are outlined below

Definitions

General approach

AS1336:1982 provides the following general introduction.

"SECTION 4. USE OF PERSONAL EYE PROTECTORS

4.1  GENERAL. Where it is not possible to eliminate or control eye hazards, personal eye protectors should be supplied to operators and visitors in areas where eye hazards occur and should be worn at all times (see also Clause 1.4). Safety spectacles provide adequate protection from most flying particles coming from work areas in front of the operator. The attachment of suitable side shields provides additional protection against flying particles and stray radiation from welding operations. The wearing of safety spectacles during exposure to flying particles should be regarded as the minimum acceptable method of protection and an essential step in any satisfactory eye protection program. Their general use needs to be supplemented by the ready availability of other types of eye protectors designed for specific applications and to provide protection against the hazards listed in Table 4.1. Safety spectacles are not designed or intended to provide protection against particles having a medium or high impact energy. Where greater protection is required it should be in the form of a wide-vision goggle, faceshield or hood. (See Tables 4.1 and 4.2.)" AS 1336:1982 Page 8

This has been changed in the most recent Standard AS 1336:1997.

"SECTION 4 USE OF PERSONAL EYE PROTECTORS

4.1  GENERAL Where it is not possible to eliminate or control eye hazards, personal eye protectors shall be supplied to operators and visitors in areas where eye hazards may exist. These eye protectors should be worn at all times (see also Clauses 1.5 and 1.6). If eye protectors are supplied, they shall comply with the relevant requirements of AS/NZS 1337, and AS/NZS 1338 Parts 1 to 3, BS EN 207 and BS EN 208. Low impact safety spectacles provide adequate protection from low velocity flying particles coming from work areas in front of the operator. The attachment of suitable side shields provides additional protection against low velocity flying particles and stray radiation from welding operations.

Wearing low impact safety spectacles during exposure to low velocity flying particles should only be regarded as the minimum method of protection, and a minimum first step in any satisfactory eye protection program. For adequate protection against the different types of hazard present in industrial environments, their general use needs to be supplemented by the ready availability of other types of eye protectors designed for protection against the hazards specific to that workplace (see Table 4.1).

Agreement should be reached between persons involved in the eye protection program on the type of protection needed and the requirements for wearing eye protectors.

Low impact safety spectacles, including prescription eye protectors, are not designed or intended to provide protection against particles having a medium or high impact energy. Where greater protection is required, it should be in the form of goggles, wide-vision spectacles, wide-vision goggles, eyeshield, faceshield or hood. (See Tables 4.1 and 4.2.)

Where protection is required against excessive sunglare or glare from visible radiation, eye protectors fitted with tinted lenses should be used (see Table 4.1). Lenses for eye protectors worn by persons driving vehicles shall comply with the transmission requirements in Table 2.1 of AS/NZS 1337. If protection is required against hazards of ultraviolet or infrared radiation from other than solar sources, e.g. for welders' assistants or furnace operators, reference should be made to Table 4.2 and Section 5.

In all work situations, personal eye protection may not protect against dangers from the side and rear. Emphasis should be given to designing work areas for risk minimization.

In order to provide protection when a face shield or hood is lifted away from the face, eye protectors of at least low-impact resistance should be worn underneath the hood or faceshield." ^[8]

Use recommendations

The following extracts from Australian / New Zealand Standard 1336:1997 Recommended Practices for Occupational Eye Protection indicate the type of protection required for buffing, grinding and scaling operations. These operations resulted in 36% (8 cases) of the injuries examined. In addition to the information in the table below, spot welding, the other major cause of eye injury in this study (41%), is deemed to require outdoor, untinted, safety spectacles.^[9]

Fitting personal eye protection

AS 1336:1997 Page 19

"4.3  ISSUE AND FITTING.* Arrangements should be made for the issuing of personal eye protectors to ensure-

1. use of the correct type of eye protector; and
2. that, wherever practicable, eye protectors are fitted to the wearer by a person who is competent to select the correct size and type.

Eye protectors may be issued in any of the following ways:

1. For exclusive use by one employee.
2. For temporary use by an employee for a particular operation.
3. For temporary use by a visitor.

The choice between an issue for exclusive use by one employee and temporary issue to different employees will depend on the frequency and duration of exposure to hazards and the type of eye protector provided. In general, the issue for exclusive use by one employee is recommended.

4.4  FOGGING AND PERSPIRATION. When necessary, suitable anti-fogging compounds should be made available for use with eye protectors. Antifog type goggles are readily available. Sweat bands may be necessary for extreme conditions and should be easily replaceable.

---

* It should be noted that variations may exist in the dispensing of prescription spectacles throughout the States and Territories of Australia, and in New Zealand. The fitting of prescription spectacles is subject to regulation in each Country, State and Territory."

Standards Australia has recently completed a review of AS1336 resulting in AS1336:1997 and will commence review of AS1337 in the near future.

Developing the study

The evidence gathered suggested the need for a more in-depth understanding of eye injuries that occurred while workers were wearing approved eye protection. The response from industry provided an opportunity to study this issue in workplaces where good supervision and work practices made it likely that almost all eye injuries would occur while workers were wearing eye protection. There was little information to guide the size of the sample needed for a sound descriptive study. It was decided to develop a pilot study that would allow for good descriptions to be made of the circumstances leading to injury across a range of tasks and eyewear combinations. The main aims were to identify cases of eye injury where approved eye protection was being worn, and to determine why the injury had occurred. It was clear from the description of the eye injuries in the emergency department data, and the literature, that there was very little evidence of eye protection failing as a result of the penetration of large or high velocity particles through the lens or guard materials. The matter of material strength is an important focus of AS 1337. The major issue was that of small particles by-passing the protection. These particles were most often larger than would be required to be described as dust, but did not represent a high energy threat to the eye. As high energy injuries were rare, it was decided not to study them at this time.

This understanding resulted in the development of a number of objectives for the study.