Characterizing Adoption of Precautionary Risk Management Guidance for Nanomaterials, an Emerging Occupational Hazard

Abstract

Exposure to engineered nanomaterials (substances with at least one dimension of 1-100 nm) has been of increased interest, with the recent growth in production and use of nanomaterials worldwide. Various organizations have recommended methods to minimize exposure to engineered nanomaterials. The purpose of this study was to evaluate available data to examine the extent to which studied U.S. companies (which represent a small fraction of all companies using certain forms of engineered nanomaterials) follow the guidelines for reducing occupational exposures to engineered nanomaterials that have been issued by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) and other organizations. Survey data, field reports, and field notes for all NIOSH nanomaterial exposure assessments conducted between 2006 and 2011 were collected and reviewed to: (1) determine the level of adoption of precautionary guidance on engineering controls and personal protective equipment (PPE), and (2) evaluate the reliability of companies' self-reported use of engineering controls and PPE. Use of PPE was observed among 89% [95% confidence interval (CI): 76%-96%] of 46 visited companies, and use of containment-based engineering controls for at least some processes was observed among 83% (95% CI: 76%-96%). In on-site evaluations, more than 90% of the 16 engineered carbonaceous nanomaterial companies that responded to an industrywide survey were observed to be using engineering controls and PPE as reported or more stringently than reported. Since PPE use was slightly more prevalent than engineering controls, better communication may be necessary to reinforce the importance of the hierarchy of controls. These findings may also be useful in conducting exposure assessment and epidemiologic research among U.S. workers handling nanomaterials.

An Exploratory Assessment of Applying Risk Management Practices to Engineered Nanomaterials

“…However, despite our lower rate of response, the number of respondent companies included in our survey ( n . 34) results is comparable to those of other previously-published international surveys, such as the 45 US participating companies in Engeman et al [12], the 35 enrolled in the US NIOSH industrywide survey of ENM manufacturers and users by Schubauer-Berigan et al [15], as well as the 40 German and Swiss companies in Helland et al [11]. Overall, this may certainly characterize a bias in interpreting the obtained results, as participating companies may represent those with a greater awareness concerning ENM risks and therefore be more responsible actors in developing/adopting preventive measures.…”

“…To overcome such knowledge-gaps, a survey-research questionnaire aimed at collecting self-reported information on ENM industrial practices, risk assessment and precautionary management strategies, was developed. To date, few self-reported surveys have been performed in Europe [11,12,14] and the US [15] in companies operating in research, development, production, and use of ENMs. Those studies’ primary goal was to verify the industrial adherence to the currently-available precautionary risk-management guidance, and the effectiveness and critical issues of such practices in promoting the overall protection of the workforce [12].…”

Assessing the protection of the nanomaterial workforce

“…A three tier approach was envisioned at the Rome Symposium. It included (1) collection and analysis of relevant studies, e.g., NIOSH (Schubauer-Berigan et al, 2015), (BAuA, EpiNano) (BauA, 2007; Guseva Canu et al, 2013; Guseva Canu et al, 2015), (2) development and early testing of a questionnaire in a pilot study, and (3) the global assessment. Various operational questions still need resolution.…”

“…The challenge is how to obtain information on which companies are producing, manufacturing, and using nanomaterials in a manner that could lead the generation of airborne nanomaterials in the breathing zone of workers. Some preliminary information from the U.S. based on a National Institute for Occupational Health (NIOSH) survey showed that in a subset of companies producing carbon nanotubes (CNTs) and other nanomaterials, there was 80% (95% CI: 63–92%) using respirators (Schubauer-Berigan et al, 2015). While this is not the most preferred control approach, it showed some indication of these companies following precautionary guidance.…”

Evaluation of existing control measures in reducing health and safety risks of engineered nanomaterials

“…Between 2006 and 2011, NIOSH conducted site visits to 46 U.S. companies that produce and/or use ENMs and collected information on the most frequently used engineering controls, housekeeping methods and PPE types 48 . Their assessment showed that the most frequently employed engineering controls for reducing occupational exposures to ENMs were local exhaust ventilation (59%) and chemical fume hoods (54%) followed by ventilated enclosures (50%), enclosed production (48%) and glove boxes (22%).…”