Is any one approach the right one?

o Traditional Air

(Reactive)

Sampling

o Qualitative

Exposure

Assessment

o Control

Banding

Unlimited IH sampling budget?

A platoon of industrial hygienists waiting for their next command?

An in-house AIHA accredited laboratory?

Didn’t think so!

Reactive or comprehensive sampling • Respond to complaints

• Respond to OSHA

• May over sample some materials

• May miss some exposures entirely

• Expensive

Review chemicals used at each site Assess their hazards Frequency of use Volume of use Number employees exposed

Determine what is really important first!

Then design a sampling strategy that fits the budget

and protects your employees

Simplified risk assessment system for chemical handling tasks

Results of reasonable quality without expert involvement

Places chemicals in broad groupings (bands) that have similar characteristics

Often used in pharmaceutical industry where no OELs exist for many compounds

Band # Hazard Group Control

1 Skin and/or eye irritant Use good industrial

hygiene practice and

general ventilation.

2 Harmful on single exposure Use local exhaust

ventilation

3 Severely irritating and/or corrosive Enclose the process

4 Very toxic on single exposure;

reproductive hazard; sensitizer

Seek expert advice

QEA CONTROL BANDING

Designed for Chemicals

with Established

Occupational Exposure

Limits

Comprehensive

Focused on Assessment &

Measurement

Chemical Specific

Exposure Judgment

Developed by AIHA

Designed for Chemicals Without: Established OELs; Little to No Toxicology Basis, or Epidemiology Data

Generic

Mostly Applicable to Small/Medium Sized Companies Without Safety & Health Resources

Tends to be Ultraconservative

Focused on Controls

Not Fully Validated

Based on the AIHA book: • A Strategy for Assessing and Managing

Occupational Exposures, 3rd Edition

William H. Bullock, MSPH, CIH, CSP

Joselito S. Ignacio, CIH, CSP, MPH, REHS

Industrial hygienists inspect the site • Review processes

• Observe employees

• Note chemicals used

• Document existing controls

• Interview employees

• Interview management

• Review past IH reports

• Review MSDS – Now SDS!

• Use the Workplace Safety QEA tool………

Where are these products used?

How often? By whom? Any PPE

used? Engineering controls?

Is this engineering control used

properly? Has it been validated

through air flow testing or

employee exposure monitoring?

How often is this sander used?

What materials are sanded? Hard

woods? Soft woods? Metals?

How is this chemical handled?

What PPE is used? What happens

in the event of a spill?

Uses an algorithm to:

• Assigns an overall risk ranking to the

chemical exposure, for the similar

exposure group (SEG)

• Suggests a sampling frequency based

on the degree of hazard

QEA Database

Considers for each similar exposure group

(SEG): • Number employees exposed to chemical hazard

e.g. 11-20 employees – ranking of “3”

• Duration of exposure

e.g. 5-15 hours/week – ranking of “2”

• Hazard ranking for inhalation (OEL range)

e.g. OEL range of 3.1 – 10 mg/m3 or >1,000 ppm –

ranking of “1”

Considers for each similar exposure group (SEG): • Degree of airborne risk e.g. medium vapor pressure – ranking of “3”

• Past air monitoring data e.g. past avg. results between 50-75% of OEL –

ranking of “16”

• Degree of Engineering Control e.g. Full engineering control in place but not yet

validated by IH monitoring within last 12 months – ranking of “2”

Considers for each similar exposure group

(SEG): • Degree of dermal risk

e.g. probable skin irritants, may cause dermatitis –

ranking of “4”

• Duration of dermal exposure

e.g. short term skin exposure is possible – ranking of

“4”

• Is the an ingestion risk?

e.g. Yes or No – Yes is ranking of “2”

TOTAL RISK:

Calculated by adding together the skin

absorption risk and whichever is higher

of the two inhalation risks (air monitoring

data vs. control); this sum is then

multiplied by the ingestion risk

Total Risk Score relates to a recommended

IH sampling frequency:

Total Risk

Score

Acceptability Final Risk

Value

IH Sampling

Frequency

<50 Acceptable 1 No Sampling Needed

50-199 Potentially

acceptable

2 Every 3 Years

200-400 Further evaluation

needed

3 Every 2 Years

>400 Potentially

unacceptable

without new controls

4 Every Year

For example when a final risk value = 3:

SAMPLE EVERY TWO YEARS

• chemical with moderate toxicity

• used by multiple employees

• used on a moderately frequent basis

• moderate potential of becoming airborne

• reasonably good engineering controls

Local Electric Utility

• In 2012, sought assistance in upgrading their IH program

• A comprehensive QEA was performed with the corporate industrial hygienist (Stan Blinta, CIH) using a database tool – from this, air monitoring strategies were developed

• Findings: some products were discovered and accounted for in the QEA that previously had not been considered. Other products were evaluated and determined to require no further analysis

Given sufficient resources or if specifically required by a special OSHA standard e.g. lead or cadmium, reactive or comprehensive IH sampling may be appropriate

If the company’s primary focus is on controls and are willing to over-engineer some solutions to avoid sampling and analysis (which may not be feasible), control banding may be the way to go

For most companies including utilities, a systematic approach to evaluating employee exposures, while keeping costs in line is the qualitative exposure assessment