Training Health and Safety Committees to Use Control Banding: Lessons Learned and Opportunities for the United States

Bracker, Anne; Morse, Timothy F.; Simcox, Nancy J.

doi:10.1080/15459620902810083

Cited by 15 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Russell et al (1998) reported that the exposure control levels recommended in the COSHH Essentials strategy were frequently in agreement with, or more stringent than, expertly derived health-based OELs. These findings were similar to those reported by Bracker, Morse, and Simcox (2009) in which the application of COSHH Essentials exposure bands were in general agreement (65%) with the exposure evaluations conducted by a certified industrial hygienist. Tischer et al (2003) also found reasonably good agreement between the COSHH Essentials exposure bands and measured airborne concentrations of solids and organic solvents (when used in medium quantities), but found that exposure concentrations could exceed predicted ranges when small quantities of organic solvents (medium/high volatility) were used.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Can control banding be useful for the safe handling of nanomaterials? A systematic review

Eastlake

Zumwalde²,

Geraci

2016

J Nanopart Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives Control banding (CB) is a risk management strategy that has been used to identify and recommend exposure control measures to potentially hazardous substances for which toxicological information is limited. The application of CB and level of expertise required for implementation and management can differ depending on knowledge of the hazard potential, the likelihood of exposure, and the ability to verify the effectiveness of exposure control measures. A number of different strategies have been proposed for using CB in workplaces where exposure to engineered nanomaterials (ENMs) can occur. However, it is unclear if the use of CB can effectively reduce worker exposure to nanomaterials. A systematic review of studies was conducted to answer the question “can control banding be useful to ensure adequate controls for the safe handling of nanomaterials.” Methods A variety of databases were searched to identify relevant studies pertaining to CB. Database search terms included ‘control’, ‘hazard’, ‘exposure’ and ‘risk’ banding as well as the use of these terms in the context of nanotechnology or nanomaterials. Other potentially relevant studies were identified during the review of articles obtained in the systematic review process. Identification of studies and the extraction of data were independently conducted by the reviewers. Quality of the studies was assessed using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS). The quality of the evidence was evaluated using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). Results A total of 235 records were identified in the database search in which 70 records were determined to be eligible for full-text review. Only two studies were identified that met the inclusion criteria. These studies evaluated the application of the CB Nanotool in workplaces where ENMs were being handled. A total of 32 different nanomaterial handling activities were evaluated in these studies by comparing the recommended exposure controls using CB to existing exposure controls previously recommended by an industrial hygienist. It was determined that the selection of exposure controls using CB were consistent with those recommended by an industrial hygienist for 19 out of 32 (59.4%) job activities. A higher level of exposure control was recommended for nine out of 32 (28.1%) job activities using CB while four out of 32 (12.5%) job activities had in place exposure controls that were more stringent than those recommended using CB. After evaluation using GRADE, evidence indicated that the use of CB Nanotool can recommend exposure controls for many ENM job activities that would be consistent with those recommended by an experienced industrial hygienist. Conclusion The use of CB for reducing exposures to ENMs has the potential to be an effective risk management strategy when information is limited on the health risk to the nanomaterial and/or there is an absence of an occupational exposure limit (OEL). However, there remains a lack of evidence to conclude...

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Can control banding be useful for the safe handling of nanomaterials? A systematic review

Eastlake

Zumwalde²,

Geraci

2016

J Nanopart Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Bracker et al (2009) performed a survey of participants who had used the COSHH Essentials model in their facility after training and reported difficulty in finding R-phrases. The same issue was also noted from the experiences of the web-based model by the authors in the present study.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Many countries would support the use of fully validated CB tools as a screen for the purpose of prioritizing exposure measurements. Such a strategy would be valuable in assisting companies to comply with the Registration, Evaluation, Authorization, and Restriction of Chemicals regulation (REACH) (European Union, 2006; Tielemans et al , 2007; Bracker et al , 2009; Ogden, 2010). …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of the COSHH Essentials Model with a Mixture of Organic Chemicals at a Medium-Sized Paint Producer

Lee

Slaven

Bowen

et al. 2010

The Annals of Occupational Hygiene

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Control of Substances Hazardous to Health (COSHH) Essentials model was evaluated using full-shift exposure measurements of five chemical components in a mixture [acetone, ethylbenzene, methyl ethyl ketone, toluene, and xylenes] at a medium-sized plant producing paint materials. Two tasks, batch-making and bucket-washing, were examined. Varying levels of control were already established in both tasks and the average exposures of individual chemicals were considerably lower than the regulatory and advisory 8-h standards. The average exposure fractions using the additive mixture formula were also less than unity (batch-making: 0.25, bucket-washing: 0.56) indicating the mixture of chemicals did not exceed the combined occupational exposure limit (OEL). The paper version of the COSHH Essentials model was used to calculate a predicted exposure range (PER) for each chemical according to different levels of control. The estimated PERs of the tested chemicals for both tasks did not show consistent agreement with exposure measurements when the comparison was made for each control method and this is believed to be because of the considerably different volatilities of the chemicals. Given the combination of health hazard and exposure potential components, the COSHH Essentials model recommended a control approach ‘special advice’ for both tasks, based on the potential reproductive hazard ascribed to toluene. This would not have been the same conclusion if some other chemical had been substituted (for example styrene, which has the same threshold limit value as toluene). Nevertheless, it was special advice, which had led to the combination of hygienic procedures in place at this plant. The probability of the combined exposure fractions exceeding unity was 0.0002 for the batch-making task indicating that the employees performing this task were most likely well protected below the OELs. Although the employees involved in the bucket-washing task had greater potential to exceed the threshold limit value of the mixture (P > 1 = 0.2375), the expected personal exposure after adjusting for the assigned protection factor for the respirators in use would be considerably lower (P > 1 = 0.0161). Thus, our findings suggested that the COSHH essentials model worked reasonably well for the volatile organic chemicals at the plant. However, it was difficult to override the reproductive hazard even though it was meant to be possible in principle. Further, it became apparent that an input of existing controls, which is not possible in the web-based model, may have allowed the model be more widely applicable. The experience of using the web-based COSHH Essentials model generated some suggestions to provide a more user-friendly tool to the model users who do not have expertise in occupational hygiene.

show abstract

“…This technique provides guidance specifically for SMEs on controlling the use of chemicals for a range of common industrial tasks (162). Other qualitative CB programs have been developed in the last 10 years including the International Labour Organization Toolkit, Belgium-REGETOX, Norway-KjemiRisk, and Netherlands Stoffenmanager (79,163). The margins of safety afforded by qualitative CB programs have been questioned and the authors stated the following:…”

Section: Control Bandingmentioning

confidence: 99%

The History and Biological Basis of Occupational Exposure Limits for Chemical Agents

Paustenbach¹,

Cyrs²

2021

Patty's Industrial Hygiene

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over the past 60 years, many organizations in numerous countries have proposed occupational exposure limits (OELs) for airborne contaminants (1). The limits or guidelines that have been the most widely accepted both in the United States and in most other countries are those issued annually by the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) and are termed Threshold Limit Values Ò (TLVs) (1-10).The usefulness of establishing OELs for potentially harmful agents in the working environment has been demonstrated repeatedly since their inception (3, 5, 6). It has been claimed that whenever these limits have been implemented in a particular industry, no worker has been shown to have sustained serious adverse effects on his health as a result of exposure to these concentrations of an industrial chemical (7). Although this statement is arguable with respect to the acceptability of OELs for those chemicals established before 1980, and later found to be carcinogenic, there is little doubt that millions of persons have avoided serious effects of workplace exposure due to their existence.

show abstract

Training Health and Safety Committees to Use Control Banding: Lessons Learned and Opportunities for the United States

Cited by 15 publications

References 27 publications

Can control banding be useful for the safe handling of nanomaterials? A systematic review

Can control banding be useful for the safe handling of nanomaterials? A systematic review

Evaluation of the COSHH Essentials Model with a Mixture of Organic Chemicals at a Medium-Sized Paint Producer

The History and Biological Basis of Occupational Exposure Limits for Chemical Agents

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About